[Philosophy is] A route of many roads leading from nowhere to nothing." --Ambrose Bierce

I agree completely with Bierce's idea of philosophy. What is this thing we call existence? Will there ever be any answers that definitively conclude anything? I don't see how there could be, because once you have found the answer to this problem, what will be the explanation to this answer? e.g. big bang created the universe - what caused the big bang, and what caused the thing that caused the big bang?

So, does anyone think we are headed somewhere where all the answers will be known - somewhere where we will be able to rest and know something for certain?

Or is the realization that this question exists our final, concluding answer?

*Please, Christians do not attempt to say I am someone searching for god and do not give me any opinions involving god - your opinion is not valued and is incompatible with the thought behind this thread.

never heard the maxim, 'the journey is more important than the destination.'?

complementing this particular truth is one of my favorite quotes,

"i searched through rebellion, drugs, diets, mysticism, religions, intellectualism and much more, only to begin to find… that truth is basically simple – and feels good, clean and right." - chick corea.

by the way, i find the core values of christianity to be extremely insightful and inspirational. there is a deep, rich philosophical tradition in christian thought.

your dismissal of their thoughts as invaluable or somehow incompatible with this topic is ridiculous. as long as they refrain from proselytizing and hijacking this thread, their thoughts on the topic shoudl be as welcome as anyone's. or is this question only for pompous pseudo-philosophers?

there are a few christian members on totse that are remarkably contemplative, and i'm curious as to their thoughts.

[This message has been edited by Eil (edited 04-24-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by chaski86:

So, does anyone think we are headed somewhere where all the answers will be known - somewhere where we will be able to rest and know something for certain?.

No.

And that's the power religion has.

They already have all the answers

to these questions.

*Please, Christians do not give me any opinions involving god - your opinion is not valued and is incompatible with the thought behind this thread.

I'm gonna appologize in advance then, since you already think this is not valued, but i'm responding because i think this is compatible with the thread.

QUOTE Originally posted by chaski86:

[Philosophy is] A route of many roads leading from nowhere to nothing." --Ambrose Bierce

There was a line from a (punk) song from the early 80's(?) "philosophy is useless, theology is worse" --Industrial Disease (i dont recall the band).

About three thousand years ago or so, King Solomon (im not argueing authorship here) wrote in proverbs 14:8 The wisdom of the wise is to understand his way, but the folly of fools is deceit-- which is basically saying the same as Eil did, concerning, 'the journey is more important than the destination.'~~~ although, the destination is important (heaven or hell), and it is 'determined' by understanding one's way, and following the right path.. but that is for another thread.

I'm not trying to take away anything from Bierce. With that said, he is not the first to have thought this (and i'm not saying that Solomon was either) .. Ecc 1:9 That which has been is that which shall be; and that which has been done is that which shall be done; and there is nothing new under the sun.--- this, in part, is addressing

Viraljimmy, "No. And that's the power religion has. They already have all the answers to these questions."

I agree completely with Bierce's idea of philosophy. What is this thing we call existence? Will there ever be any answers that definitively conclude anything? I don't see how there could be, because once you have found the answer to this problem, what will be the explanation to this answer?

Solomon said this too. Read the book of Ecclesiastes. I'm not going to give you a commentary of this book (although i started with something along that line in mind). After reading this book, i would think that you would agree that Solomon really has the "feel" of the answers to your thread, and personally, i really like his conclussion and hope you do as well.

I've said a few times in the past in this forum, "if there is no God, nothing really matters".

To sum up Solomon:

'all the things we do; we do for ourselves, our loved ones, and/or our world -- but in the end, we die. We leave our legacy (both good and bad), to those we have left behind... for someone else to either enjoy or clean up, to revere or to let rot." If, as Eil has said, "the journey is more important than the destination" then "there IS nothing new under the sun, ALL is vanity". But if God exists, then the destination IS WHY the journey is important.



So, does anyone think we are headed somewhere where all the answers will be known - somewhere where we will be able to rest and know something for certain?

Or is the realization that this question exists our final, concluding answer?

I'm pretty sure that you know my answer. But for you and your life, you are the one that needs to answer this for yourself. Please allow me to add one more passage from the Bible-- this time from the N.T.-- which is relevant to this question of your post and also sums up what Solomon has said:

remember, God is Love

1st Corinthians chapter 13

1 If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am become sounding brass, or a clanging cymbal.

2 And if I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.

3 And if I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and if I give my body to be burned, but have not love, it profiteth me nothing.

4 Love suffereth long, and is kind; love envieth not; love vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up,

5 doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not its own, is not provoked, taketh not account of evil;

6 rejoiceth not in unrighteousness, but rejoiceth with the truth;

7 beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.

8 Love never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall be done away; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall be done away.

9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part;

10 but when that which is perfect is come, that which is in part shall be done away.

11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I felt as a child, I thought as a child: now that I am become a man, I have put away childish things.

12 For now we see in a mirror, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know fully even as also I was fully known.

13 But now abideth faith, hope, love, these three; and the greatest of these is love.

Eil,

quote:"i searched through rebellion, drugs, diets, mysticism, religions, intellectualism and much more, only to begin to find… that truth is basically simple – and feels good, clean and right." - chick corea.

Sorta sounds like Solomon http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)

In response to Eil:

"the journey is more important than the destination."

I believe I did not mention either journey or destination, rather I asked questions involving the mystery of existence. This does not deal with your classic 'heaven and hell' or journeys or any of that shit. I didn't ask for sappy, one-liners that make people feel all emotional and warm inside. This is what your Confucious-type quote is - emotional garbage.

I asked Christians not to contribute so that they wouldn't hijack the thread, they wouldn't try to preach to me, and because I don't value their opinion. There is not a "rich philosophical tradition in christian thought" and this is why I ask them not to post. So, yes, this thread is only for "pompous pseudo-philosophers".

As for the few Totse members that are remarkably contemplative christians, I have never found one. This is why I have asked for christians to refrain from sharing their opinion. I have had enough of their shit.

This means you xtreem - keep your bible verses to yourself.



[This message has been edited by chaski86 (edited 04-24-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by chaski86:

In response to Eil:

"the journey is more important than the destination."

I believe I did not mention either journey or destination, rather I asked questions involving the mystery of existence. This does not deal with your classic 'heaven and hell' or journeys or any of that shit. I didn't ask for sappy, one-liners that make people feel all emotional and warm inside. This is what your Confucious-type quote is - emotional garbage.

I asked Christians not to contribute so that they wouldn't hijack the thread, they wouldn't try to preach to me, and because I don't value their opinion. There is not a "rich philosophical tradition in christian thought" and this is why I ask them not to post. So, yes, this thread is only for "pompous pseudo-philosophers".

As for the few Totse members that are remarkably contemplative christians, I have never found one. This is why I have asked for christians to refrain from sharing their opinion. I have had enough of their shit.

This means you xtreem - keep your bible verses to yourself.





LOL, your funny, you ask a question, but dont want an answer, i am pretty sure that Eil is not Christian, i was not attempting to hijack your thread, Bible verses or not-- these addressed your question, these commas are here for a purpose, pause, relax, enjoy life, if you looked too hard for the answers of life-- you will end up missing much, enjoy.

Wrong Forum (if you don't want any "opinions involving god" then don't post in a forum named: My God Can Beat the Shit Out of Your God). Post in Humanities.

[This message has been edited by Doey (edited 04-25-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by Eil:

"i searched through rebellion, drugs, diets, mysticism, religions, intellectualism and much more, only to begin to find… that truth is basically simple – and feels good, clean and right." - chick corea.



When did he make that quote? I hope he wasn't talking about scientology. Chick Corea is was too much of a badass to be into that shit. A bunch of kids at school got to see him perform a couple weeks ago, and from what I hear, he was amazing.

quote:Originally posted by chaski86:

I believe I did not mention either journey or destination, rather I asked questions involving the mystery of existence. This does not deal with your classic 'heaven and hell' or journeys or any of that shit. I didn't ask for sappy, one-liners that make people feel all emotional and warm inside. This is what your Confucious-type quote is - emotional garbage.

the concept of a journey is implied in the quote, aristotle.

geez, let me try this again. back to your original post:

your question is a philosophical one, no?

as you've stated, you agree completely with bierce's description of philosophy.

in that case, according to your own understanding, your question has no legitimacy. it's nonsense. it is born in ignorance, and it will die in ignorance.

there is no true curiousity behind your inquiry - you are apparently infatuated with your ability to wax philosophical, as if it is something unique and novel.

in reality you have only demonstrated an utterly uninspired and droll grasp of 'the mystery of existence.'

the maxim i stated may appear warm and sappy if dismissed after superficial consideration, but what i intended was anything but comforting. the idea that life's ultimate reason may be forever beyond our grasp is a difficult one to accept.

i didn't mention it to make anyone feel cozy, read it again. it was a challenge to you, to stop engaging in embarrassingly arrogant pseudo-intellectual masturbation in front of people smart enough to recognize it, and to consider the possibility that such nonsense only serves to pervert the ego.

lest you overlook the depth of my intended meaning again, let me outline what you said and my response:

YOU:

1. philosophy comes from nowhere, goes in many directions, leads to nowhere.

2. is it leading somewhere?

3. i only value opinions that fit into a generic mold i've stereotyped to make it easier for me to swallow.

ME:

1. you're shallow.

quote:Originally posted by Shadout Mapes:

When did he make that quote? I hope he wasn't talking about scientology. Chick Corea is was too much of a badass to be into that shit. A bunch of kids at school got to see him perform a couple weeks ago, and from what I hear, he was amazing.

i don't know when he said it. i read it a while ago and didn't even know who chick corea was. i don't think he's into scientology. maybe i'll check out his music someday, but i'm not huge into jazz.

[This message has been edited by Eil (edited 04-26-2005).]

chaski86:

I'm more inclined to agree with Lagneau, who said (in a paraphrased form, considering I don't have the text available to me from which I can directly quote) philosophy was the train of thought that saw into its own inadequacy and subsequently summoned one to action.

In relation to your question, I think that philosophy shouldn't be concerned with a creative sense of curiosity that leads to questions like the eternal Why of which you speak. I think of philosophy as more of an idea of what to do once you've encountered these things with such origins.

Or, scientists and philosophers might eventually understand the metaphorical correlation between the two, and they wouldn't clash the way they seem to love doing.

quote:"the concept of a journey is implied in the quote, aristotle."

It's called a fucking metaphor. It helps us understand what Bierce is trying to convey through comparison with things we are familiar with. Journey is implied only if you read the quote with the insight of a third grader.

quote:"lest you overlook the depth of my intended meaning again"

I am supposed to find depth and understand all that you are trying to say from reading only this: "'the journey is more important than the destination.'?" ?!?

quote:as you've stated, you agree completely with bierce's description of philosophy.

in that case, according to your own understanding, your question has no legitimacy.

You clearly do not understand where I'm coming from. Your logic that 'proves' my question to be illigitimate has little to no value to a person who feels the way Bierce does. Confusion (nowhere to nothing) no longer values logic. This is what I am asking. Does anyone else feel this way about philosophy and existance? If you feel like, instead of answering the question, you have to go into some Freudian analysis of my ego, please, exercise your frustrations elsewhere.

quote:in reality you have only demonstrated an utterly uninspired and droll grasp of 'the mystery of existence.'

Eil, you are the only one that fits this description.

quote:i only value opinions that fit into a generic mold i've stereotyped to make it easier for me to swallow.

I'm biased against people I don't agree with. I don't believe in being fair or politically correct. At least I can admit to this. I would like to hear the opinions of people I don't agree with, I simply cannot tolerate anything that comes from the Christian mind.

Eil, fuck off.



[This message has been edited by chaski86 (edited 04-27-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by chaski86:

It's called a fucking metaphor. It helps us understand what Bierce is trying to convey through comparison with things we are familiar with. Journey is implied only if you read the quote with the insight of a third grader.

again, by your own logic, my quote is a metaphor as well, and therefore, equally valid. kick and scream all you want, it changes nothing.

quote:Originally posted by chaski86:

I am supposed to find depth and understand all that you are trying to say from reading only this: "'the journey is more important than the destination.'?" ?!?

you're not supposed to, that's why it was a challenge. it was intentionally subtle, both to see if you actually possess the ability to read between the lines to figure shit out for yourself, and to spare you further embarrassment from continuing with your myopic idiocy by providing an out. after all, i was not convinced of your douche-ness until now.

quote:Originally posted by chaski86:

You clearly do not understand where I'm coming from. Your logic that 'proves' my question to be illigitimate has little to no value to a person who feels the way Bierce does. Confusion (nowhere to nothing) no longer values logic.

so what don't i understand then? i already said you lack critical thinking - you just confirmed it yourself.

where was i wrong? oh wait, you might have to employ logic to prove anything... better just stick your head back up your ass and following your own advice - fuck off.

don't think too hard about it, just FEEL how right i am. there's no logic too it.

quote:Originally posted by chaski86:

Eil, you are the only one that fits this description.

i don't value the opinions of people who don't value deductive thought. they're not based on reality.

[This message has been edited by Eil (edited 04-27-2005).]

quote:i don't value the opinions of people who don't value deductive thought. they're not based on reality.

Yet you value the opinions of Christians. How do they logically concieve of a god?

This just makes your lack of understanding of the issue at hand more apparent. When you think the way Bierce does, confusion is all that you know. You are still confined to the limits of logic. Logic breaks down when one has to prove it's primary axiom. This does not give credit to those who believe in a 'supreme being' it just takes credit away from everyone who is confined to the limits of their own brain, including myself.

don't trip up. i never said i categorically value the opinion of christians, which is how you make it seem. i said i value the opinion of certain christians in this forum. how these particular thinkers logically conceive of a god is exactly where my interest lies.

you, however, have categorically stated that you do not value the opinions of christians. in so doing, the only confining logic in this thread is of your own making.

that rare intellectual christian could post in this forum, and possess ten times the education, understanding, and life experience that you possess. he could state observations so profound and truths so evident as to impact your life until the day you die, but you may never share in such a person's wisdom and understanding until you break down your own logic.

man, i haven't been arguing for conversion, i'm not christian by any conventional understanding of the word, i've only been advocating for the permission of a free exchange of ideas... just open contemplation on this question you posed.

if it's such a big deal, maybe i'll start my own thread with the same question, and label it 'no atheists'... we can have another one for 'whites only'... etc...

apparently the best way to get from nowhere to nothing is to travel on lonely roads that don't intersect. wow. we've come so far.

quote:Originally posted by chaski86:



This means you xtreem - keep your bible verses to yourself.



You come to a religious debate forum, and expect that certain religions you don't agree with are not going to be represented ?

To that I say, "You're a prick."

quote:Posted by Eil:

there is no true curiousity behind your inquiry - you are apparently infatuated with your ability to wax philosophical, as if it is something unique and novel.

Friggin' brilliant.

http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)

quote:You come to a religious debate forum, and expect that certain religions you don't agree with are not going to be represented ?

To that I say, "You're a prick."

And this is coming from a person who's screenname is Digital_Savior. You are doing the same thing I and everyone else are doing: not valuing other's religions or views. Your screenname simply says that you post to save others from their wrong beliefs and their wrongdoings. You are the most intolerant of all Totseans. This is obvious. Stop fooling yourself.



[This message has been edited by chaski86 (edited 04-30-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by chaski86:

And this is coming from a person who's screenname is Digital_Savior. You are doing the same thing I and everyone else are doing: not valuing other's religions or views. Your screenname simply says that you post to save others from their wrong beliefs and their wrongdoings. You are the most intolerant of all Totseans. This is obvious. Stop fooling yourself.







lol her screen name is... nah, i'll let Dig defend herself lol

quote:Originally posted by Eil:



"i searched through rebellion, drugs, diets, mysticism, religions, intellectualism and much more, only to begin to find… that truth is basically simple – and feels good, clean and right." - chick corea.



has he tried all religons?

chaski86:

So, you oppose intolerance, but refuse to value the opinions and ideas of Christians by mere virtue of the fact that they are Christians?

In fact, you have, with majestically irresponsible and stubborn levels of ignorance, done everything in your power to express your contempt for people who disagree with Bierce, and have, in fact, neglected to make an attempt at addressing my serious and secular consideration of your question.

I suspect you're not looking for opposition, but target practice for your flaming technique.

Next time, post to clarify your world view; don't post merely to antagonize those of others.

quote:Originally posted by john_deer:

has he tried all religons?



why does it matter?

quote:Originally posted by john_deer:

has he tried all religons?

I don't need to live in every country in Africa to realize that they all suck and America rules.[/random musing]

quote:Originally posted by chaski86:

Yet you value the opinions of Christians. How do they logically concieve of a god?



My understanding is that philosophy is a preparing for death, and whilst god cannot be proven in an actual physical sense, on another level god is necessary for anyone who wishes to live a 'moral' life. Any person who sets a standard for personal actions eventually must refer to a supreme standard. Something they set above all other considerations as their guide, their 'god'.

The universe exists because there is no alternative, there cannot be nothing, nothing cannot and does not exist. Something does not come from nothing existence cannot come from non-existence. Being cannot come from non-being and being cannot become non-being. Existence is imperative, energy is never lost, it simply changes form. In the maelstrom of entropic transformation that which was old becomes something new.

There never was a 'beginning' and there never will be a final concluding answer. The only constant is change.

Namaste http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)

quote:if it's such a big deal, maybe i'll start my own thread with the same question, and label it 'no atheists'... we can have another one for 'whites only'... etc...

Eil, you have every right to do so. If you post a thread dealing with "The Love of God" then I don't think an atheist has any business posting in such a thread. I started a thread dealing with philosophy, which I believe does not involve Christianity, dogma, or theology. Philosophy and theology are two different things (similar, perhaps, but quite different). So kick the atheists out of your thread - I will respect your wish for me not to fuck up your argument or the point you are trying to get across through your thread.

quote:lol her screen name is... nah, i'll let Dig defend herself lol

It looks like she won't defend herself, so go ahead xtreem, defend her. I would very much like to know what this screenname means.

quote:So, you oppose intolerance, but refuse to value the opinions and ideas of Christians by mere virtue of the fact that they are Christians?

Tyrant, I have nothing against you and I appreciated your contribution to the initial subject of the thread. But, your post is out of line like most of the others here. I never said that I oppose intolerance - I am neutral on the subject as on most others.

quote:In fact, you have, with majestically irresponsible and stubborn levels of ignorance, done everything in your power to express your contempt for people who disagree with Bierce, and have, in fact, neglected to make an attempt at addressing my serious and secular consideration of your question.

I suspect you're not looking for opposition, but target practice for your flaming technique.

I would have liked to have addressed your serious contribution to the thread. Unfortunately, I was held back by all the people that wished to attack my ego, intolerance, and ignorance instead of attacking the question.

I never expressed my contempt of people's opinions of Bierce's philosophy definition. I just did not appreciate Bible verses or things relating to God. I had hoped my first post would have avoided this conflict but it seems to have only created it.

I don't give a fuck about flaming. I am only defending myself.

Thanks to doey for pointing out to me there is a forum dealing with philosophy. I should have posted this thread in 'Humanities' to begin with.

For those who posted ideas relevant to the intial topic, thank you. I do not wish to address these contributions now, however. I feel the momentum of the thread never picked up and the whole point of the thread is gone. It was hijacked, despite the efforts to avoid this.

QUOTE Originally posted by chaski86:

For those who posted ideas relevant to the intial topic, thank you.

You're welcome.

It was hijacked, despite the efforts to avoid this.

If by hijacked, you mean a Christian gave relevant answers that were biblical, then i'm sorry that you are so blinded. If the biblical answers were not on topic, then you never pointed out why.

My youngest step-daughter (12) had a homework assignment that was about quotes and proverbs. The very first one was from the bible (others included an old african saying, Nietzsche, Confucius, etc.) Since all she saw was the word 'bible', she did not read further. Instead, she asked for help. But the very first question that she had to answer was, "Which proverb or quote did you like the most?; What did it mean to you?; Show how it fits with your life.

I think that that is what you did. You have your blinders on about anything pertaining to the bible, without even thinking that the subject may not only be relevant but even have answers.

It was not your thread that got hijacked, it is your outlook.

quote:Originally posted by chaski86:

Eil, you have every right to do so. If you post a thread dealing with "The Love of God" then I don't think an atheist has any business posting in such a thread. I started a thread dealing with philosophy, which I believe does not involve Christianity, dogma, or theology. Philosophy and theology are two different things (similar, perhaps, but quite different).

'Intolerance will not be tolerated.'

quote:If by hijacked, you mean a Christian gave relevant answers that were biblical, then i'm sorry that you are so blinded. If the biblical answers were not on topic, then you never pointed out why.

By hijacked, I mean people attacked my intolerance, ego, and intelligence. You posted relevant ideas, yet I asked you (a Christian, I assume) to refrain from posting. I have made up my mind that I do not and will not agree with Christianity - at least not when it comes to philosophy.

I have not dismissed this belief without reviewing it. Over 10 years of understanding the foundational beliefs of Christianity is enough time to realize it is false and the practice disgusting. Christianity is not that complicated. It is simple and mistaken. Any advice for me to study it some more for 'it is a deep religion' will be ignored. Again, I am intolerant. You don't have to point this out to me again.

'Intolerance will not be tolerated'. Again, sorry. I am in the wrong forum, which was pointed out to me earlier. See you in Humanities!

[This message has been edited by chaski86 (edited 05-02-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by chaski86:

And this is coming from a person who's screenname is Digital_Savior. You are doing the same thing I and everyone else are doing: not valuing other's religions or views. Your screenname simply says that you post to save others from their wrong beliefs and their wrongdoings. You are the most intolerant of all Totseans. This is obvious. Stop fooling yourself.





Nope.

Nope.

And...

Nope.

quote:Posted by Chaski:

It looks like she won't defend herself, so go ahead xtreem, defend her. I would very much like to know what this screenname means.

And why won't I ? Because I didn't within ten minutes of you posting this garbage ?

*laughs*

My name is of no importance to you, since you like to assume things, and not wait for real answers.

I don't pretend to be anything I am not.

If I say, "You're a prick." and it isn't true, then you could concievably say that I am sinning, and therefore in violation of my own faith.

Since it IS true, I am good to go.

Your thread was hijacked by yourself, with your very first post.

Don't be a prick, and Totse members won't point it out.

lol, wow Digi. I never thought you wouldn't even attempt to explain your screenname. Your insults show that you have no argument. So, c'mon, give it a try - defend yourself instead of trying to turn it back around on me.

quote:Originally posted by Digital_Savior:

You come to a religious debate forum, and expect that certain religions you don't agree with are not going to be represented ?

To that I say, "You're a prick."



From the modern vs. christ's thread...

quote:Originally posted by Digital_Savior:

REQUEST: If you hate Christianity and Christians, don't bother posting. I don't want to hear it...save it for another forum.

Anyone else is welcome to post their thoughts.

quote:Originally posted by chaski86:

I have not dismissed this belief without reviewing it. Over 10 years of understanding the foundational beliefs of Christianity is enough time to realize it is false and the practice disgusting. Christianity is not that complicated. It is simple and mistaken. Any advice for me to study it some more for 'it is a deep religion' will be ignored.

you should study these HIGHLY INFLUENTIAL PHILOSOPHERS who happen to be christian:

thomas of aquinas, augustine, dionysius, erasmus, john duns scotus, descartes, isaac newton, samuel clarke, hobbes, malthus, john locke, george berkely, kierkegaard, gabriel marcel, etc...

Sweet shit! Thank you for pointing this out so clearly, Tesseract! Hopefully this will shut her the fuck up once and for all.

Eil, good point. Good call. I didn't know Descartes was Christian, and I do agree with Aquinas' reasoning as far as logic goes. But, I would have to disagree with them on the idea of a God that has human characteristics and attributes. I have no trouble believing in a god that is defined as 'primary or principle mover' as Aquinas has described. This simply uses the term god to describe that which we don't know or understand. It does not involve a loving, caring, all-powerful being. Unfortunately, this is how most Christians (that I have come into contact with) believe. This is why I do not wish to hear their opinions. I realize that I should have specified when asking this group not to contribute to the thread. I just didn't feel like hearing any fundi, fanatic Christian opinions.

Thanks Eil, I will look at some of these philosophers ideas.

quote:Originally posted by chaski86:

lol, wow Digi. I never thought you wouldn't even attempt to explain your screenname. Your insults show that you have no argument. So, c'mon, give it a try - defend yourself instead of trying to turn it back around on me.

I have explained my screen name here on Totse more than once...and several people can attest to that, if you care to ask.

You chiding me won't make me change my mind.

I don't need to waste such explanations on someone that can't wait for the answers.

TESS:

Asking people not to spew their hate-speech in my thread is totally different than expecting them to not have a religious viewpoint about any given topic.

Apples and oranges.

Nice try, though.

More like fujis and grannies. You said it yourself, you didn't want anyone who didn't like christianity and christians to bother posting. You could have just as easily asked people to try and keep their posts relevant to that specific topic.

Chaski, at least, was considerate enough to let people know the exact sort of thing he wasn't interested in hearing, as opposed to dismissing the opinions of a certain group entirely.

In any case, hate speech wasn't mentioned. I don't expect you to believe it, but people who don't believe as you may still have valid opinions relevant to that topic, and can express them without using hate speech.

Besides, you can still have your viewpoint without expressing it in every single thread in this whole forum.

[This message has been edited by Tesseract (edited 05-04-2005).]