A penitent troll apologises for mocking atheism. On show here!

@Frank Apisa,

What are your reasons for it seeming that I disagree with you?

If it is a secret then let me know unless that is a secret also.

If it is not a secret then I await your reasons for it seeming that I disagree with you...

1 Reply

@igm,

igm wrote:

What is your reason for it seeming that I disagree with you?

If it is a secret then let me know unless that is a secret also.

If it is not a secret then I await your reasons for it seeming that I disagree with you...

It is all explained in my earlier post, igm. I don't want to go over it again.

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Bit of philosophy to ponder:

"One hand clapping" is much easier to dish out than to have fed to ya!

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

igm wrote:

What is your reason for it seeming that I disagree with you?

If it is a secret then let me know unless that is a secret also.

If it is not a secret then I await your reasons for it seeming that I disagree with you...

It is all explained in my earlier post, igm. I don't want to go over it again.

It isn't clear to me, could you explain it more clearly? At the moment I think you're fibbing... I'm sure you wouldn't want me to think that you are a fibber would you? I'm tempted to call you a liar... but I'll wait and see your response to this post first...

1 Reply

@igm,

igm wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:

igm wrote:

What is your reason for it seeming that I disagree with you?

If it is a secret then let me know unless that is a secret also.

If it is not a secret then I await your reasons for it seeming that I disagree with you...

It is all explained in my earlier post, igm. I don't want to go over it again.

It isn't clear to me, could you explain it more clearly? At the moment I think you're fibbing... I'm sure you wouldn't want me to think that you are a fibber would you? I'm tempted to call you a liar... but I'll wait and see your response to this post first...

Well...if it will make you happy to call me a liar...by all means do so. I love to see people happy...and never cease to be amazed at what makes them happy.

Figure it out.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

You seem to me to be a liar Frank... you seem to have given no evidence that I was disagreeing with you... I may be wrong... you may just be more intellectually challenged than I guessed you were. Or there may be some other reason... but I fail see one, so you'll have to give one if you have one... or I'll just have to say you seem like a liar to me... and leave it there.

1 Reply

@igm,

igm wrote:

You seem to me to be a liar Frank... you seem to have given no evidence that I was disagreeing with you... I may be wrong... you may just be more intellectually challenged than I guessed you were. Or there may be some other reason... but I fail see one, so you'll have to give one if you have one... or I'll just have to say you seem like a liar to me... and leave it there.

If I seem a liar to you, igm...I accept that I seem a liar to you.

You don't have to explain that.

If you guess me to be intellectually challenged...I accept that to be your guess.

You don't have to explain that either.

Wink

1 Reply

In any case, John Jones Cardiff...

...not believing something does not obligate you to believe in the opposite direction. You can, for instance, "not believe gods exist" AND "not believe gods do not exist." There is no problem with that...you just do not have to guess either way.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Interesting (reply to my post/s) !!!??? Not in a good way.

1 Reply

@igm,

igm wrote:

Interesting!!!???

Thank you for the part that goes "!!!."

As for the part that goes "???"...

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Spell out your position (final draft) and I'll tell you that I don't disagree with it. As I haven't yet in this thread... disagreed with it.

1 Reply

@JohnJonesCardiff,

JohnJonesCardiff wrote:

Yes, that penitent troll is me. I reject my former post about atheists in which I described them as not believing in Gods that live in a particular region of outer space. What a fool I was.

Now, I believe and accept the atheist's arguments against supernaturalism, and against any wild imagining that has no material reality. This belief is going to be hard to follow, but I can do it with your support.

In particular, I would like support in knowing how not to believe in colours and sounds. I have tried weighing them and at first inspection it looks as though they have no weight or material reality. I also have trouble in locating and weighing a patriots duty, and the fact that this is my pen.

0 Replies

@JohnJonesCardiff,

I hope I don't seem to be a literalist, but colors and sounds are easily measurable. Religious things, however, are beliefs based on blind faith. Do you really believe that Mary was a virgin when she gave birth?

1 Reply

@igm,

igm wrote:

Spell out your position (final draft) and I'll tell you that I don't disagree with it.

http://able2know.org/topic/229897-2#post-5533442

Quote:

As I haven't yet in this thread... disagreed with it.

I did not say you disagreed with it, igm. I said it "seems to me that you disagree with it."

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

igm wrote:

Spell out your position (final draft) and I'll tell you that I don't disagree with it.

Frank Apisa wrote:

http://able2know.org/topic/229897-2#post-5533442

...not believing something does not obligate you to believe in the opposite direction. You can, for instance, "not believe gods exist" AND "not believe gods do not exist." There is no problem with that...you just do not have to guess either way.

I don't disagree with, 'it'.

Quote:

As I haven't yet in this thread... disagreed with it.

Frank Apisa wrote:

I did not say you disagreed with it, igm. I said it "seems to me that you disagree with it."

So, you didn't say I disagreed with it because you prefixed it with, "it seems to me", and that makes a difference because!!!???

1 Reply

@igm,

igm wrote:

igm wrote:

Spell out your position (final draft) and I'll tell you that I don't disagree with it.

Frank Apisa wrote:

http://able2know.org/topic/229897-2#post-5533442

...not believing something does not obligate you to believe in the opposite direction. You can, for instance, "not believe gods exist" AND "not believe gods do not exist." There is no problem with that...you just do not have to guess either way.

I don't disagree with, 'it'.

Quote:
As I haven't yet in this thread... disagreed with it.

Frank Apisa wrote:

I did not say you disagreed with it, igm. I said it "seems to me that you disagree with it."

So, you didn't say I disagreed with it because you prefixed it with, "it seems to me", and that makes a difference because!!!???

Think of the difference between "It seemed to me she was dead"...and "She was dead."

That is the difference it makes, igm. They are two different things.

You do not seem to be your universal, naturally totally happy and content self today. Have you meditated?

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

You do not seem to be your universal, naturally totally happy and content self today. Have you meditated?

As you've prefixed your sentence with another version of 'seems to me' as you've already explained it doesn't mean anything.

If I asked you to provide evidence for this then we could, 'go round again'.

I'll just say you are wrong, how things seem to you is a delusion, I am unconditionally happy (actually it's a type of bliss) as always but can still become ill and experience physical pain... (it's always there in the background... the bliss) as usual. This bliss does not depend on any causes and conditions or depends on all causes and conditions or any causes and conditions... that is not true of ephemeral mundane happiness... the sort that you sometimes have due to specific difficult to obtain causes and conditions.

It is available to you but it's just out of sight... like the 18th hole from the 17th on some golf courses.

1 Reply

@igm,

If you don't play all 18 holes you can't expect to experience it... certainly not by saying, 'it's only a guess' whilst looking out of the clubhouse window.

1 Reply

@igm,

igm wrote:

If you don't play all 18 holes you can't expect to experience it... certainly not by saying, 'it's only a guess' whilst looking out of the clubhouse window.

I am sure that made sense to you. It didn't to me.

Perhaps golf analogies are not really your thing.

1 Reply

@G H,

G H wrote:

JohnJonesCardiff wrote:
Really? Does green weigh more than red for a red colour blind person?

Eh, remember that color names were hijacked for designating certain environmental energies in recent centuries (ironically rendering those newer purposes "colorless"). Red and green will respectively be interpreted as referring to wavelengths of 622-780 nanometers and 492-577 nanometers, unless you instead specify that you mean the phenomenal properties associated with visual experiences. Heck, one might contend that red (or its equivalent in any other language) was originally meant to be a literal external attribute of objects like cherries and tomatoes, and that the idea of it being a psychological / subjective experience (quale) is as much a recent duty as the name serving as a tag for part of the visible electromagnetic spectrum.

There is no material evidence to show that any wavelength of light is red. The reason is simple. Red is not material and is not found in the world.

This is how it works. The language-game or discourse that employs the term "red" is sometimes extended to select a particular wavelength of light. The wavelength does not show or identify itself to be, in reality, red.

0 Replies

A penitent troll apologises for mocking atheism. On show here!

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know