well - your response proves my point to a friend with whom i had a bet - i won a nice sum - thanks
Are most people just plain stupid?
by logansrun 245 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
seesthesky
also - abbadon - attributing my thoughts to me then derisively labeling them crackpot exposes the fact that for some reason you felt/thought it necessary to name call instead of address i don't know why nor do i particularly care but i must point out that the "carackpot" foundations of my post simply reiterate well established principles of physics, absent the math (correct my use of absent if you will - lol - help me win another bet) indeed, i know quite precisely of what i speak because i helped establish some of these foundations in these dying years, i now like to use that knowledge and my knowledge of human behavior to make wagers based on predictions of human behavior with those less cynical than I - please help me win another bet by making another interesting response - ciao
-
Abaddon
seethesky:
well - your response proves my point to a friend with whom i had a bet - i won a nice sum - thanks
I believe that as much as I believe the other stuff you wrote. Is it nice having your very own parrallel Universe? Please update your version of reality.
also - abbadon - attributing my thoughts to me then derisively labeling them crackpot ...
That's a bit hypocritical, isn't it? You were the one who started labeling peole as having 'epistemic naivety'. I thought that was derisive... but apparently you want to insult ands not be insulted. Oh, could you define 'epistemic naivety'.for me by the way? I know what it means... I want to see if you know what it means... and, out of sheer curiosity, who would I attribute your thoughts to, other than you?
Anyway, where were we... you were being derisive and then got upset it got fed back to you... well, if you are telling people how wrong they are and the very foundation of your justification is based on bad science, well, maybe you deserve a little derision? If you told someone who knew a lot about making guitars they should use super-glue and balsa, they would be derisive of your opinion too.
Somehow 'white collar' science is something anyone can express an opinion on, no matter how dumb, and expect back-slaps. Yet, if someone expresses a dumb opinion about 'blue-collar' artisans, it's far more acceptable to laugh at the arrogance and presumption behind the dumb opinion.
exposes the fact that for some reason you felt/thought it necessary to name call instead of address i don't know why nor do i particularly care but i must point out that the "carackpot" foundations of my post simply reiterate well established principles of physics, absent the math (correct my use of absent if you will - lol - help me win another bet)
I addressed your point. Your starting premise is unsupported and everything else in your post depends upon that premise. I do have doubts that you would recognise a "well established principles of physics" even if you were accelerating at 9.8m/s/s.
This of course is the point where, if you know what you're talking about and are not simply parroting rubbish you've picked up from the Chinese Whispers that dominate alternative scientific discourse, you will grind me to dust underneath your heel by showing that I am wrong. Go on then. I love being proved wrong. It means I have something new to learn.
i know quite precisely of what i speak because i helped establish some of these foundations in these dying years, i now like to use that knowledge and my knowledge of human behavior to make wagers based on predictions of human behavior with those less cynical than I - please help me win another bet by making another interesting response - ciao
Still waiting, but all you're doing is moving the air round with that gum-flapping. Keep your pathetic fantasies to yourself, they don't impress me. Simply prove what you say; and this time don't be such a hypocrite and complain about being treated derisively when that's exactly what you did yourself.
... they're coming to take you away ha ha, they're coming to take you away...
-
Sirona
Abaddon,
I love being proved wrong. It means I have something new to learn.
Even if you are right about something, you can still learn from the experience of interacting with someone in an argument / discussion. I get the impression that you are so focused on facts and figures that you may forget that learning isn't always about winning arguments or being proved wrong.
Sirona
-
Abaddon
Hey Sirona; merry Crimble to you by the way...
Even if you are right about something, you can still learn from the experience of interacting with someone in an argument / discussion.
Didn't say otherwise. I have learnt an awful lot about misdirection and evasion, for example, in discussions with people who want their proofless opinons treated with respect whilst they fail to return any respect for the opinions of people who can defend their opinions with the presentation of supporting evidence.
I know we have different viewpoints on this Sirona; I feel (and my characterisation may not be fair) that you feel 'why shouldn't we believe these claims', whereas my approach is 'why should we believe these claims'. Different paradigms, you don't have to agree with me.
I get the impression that you are so focused on facts and figures that you may forget that learning isn't always about winning arguments or being proved wrong.
Learning isn't about winning arguments, it's about KNOWING things, not assuming thing hoping things or wishing thing.
Hey, I got a meeting to go to...
-
Sirona
Abaddon,
Merry Christmas and Blessed Yule.
in discussions with people who want their proofless opinons treated with respect whilst they fail to return any respect for the opinions of people who can defend their opinions with the presentation of supporting evidence.
I hope you are not referring to me. I respect you and your opinion. Also, not all of my opinions are "proofless" LOL
know we have different viewpoints on this Sirona; I feel (and my characterisation may not be fair) that you feel 'why shouldn't we believe these claims', whereas my approach is 'why should we believe these claims'. Different paradigms, you don't have to agree with me.
You're a little off with this. I don't think anyone should or shouldn't believe anything. I can only say what I believe, and I believe it based on my own *subjective* experience. I think that we all see the world in different ways so what is right for one person isn't always right for another. Therefore, if someone tells me they believe that they are visited by a pink bunny every time its going to rain, then I'm not going to demand proof of that. If they say that I should believe in the pink bunny, then I'll respectfully say that I have my own beliefs based on my own experience and learning.
Learning isn't about winning arguments, it's about KNOWING things, not assuming thing hoping things or wishing thing.
MMM, that is where I'd disagree with you. I think that the process of learning does involve assuming things and then testing that assumption. I also think that one can learn very much by hoping and wishing. If I wish for xyz I can learn a great deal about myself in the long term and whether that wish was in my interests, how it reflected my state of mind, how I pursued the "wish" as though it was a goal....etc. Similarly my hopes can tell me a great deal about the hopes of other people. You see, in my world, head knowledge is only one factor in what is "real" and what we can learn.
Sirona
-
BluesBrother
I guess the heat of this thread has blown out now, but I could not help but think of the life story of a man in the Awake Jan 22, p19. His name is Alton Williams ( I am sorry if anyone has commented on him before) .. What makes a nuclear scientist, employed by NASA embrace the JW faith with all its illogical reasoning? This man with a great education and undoubted IQ is particularly impressed by the chronology from Daniel chapt 4 -9. "My mind was set on finding mathematical inconsistenies with this presentation but I found none"
Is he a "Plain stupid" man, evidently not . But has he acted wisely? I guess we would all say not
It is clear to me that beliesfs and life choices are based more on intuition than logic, no matter what we kid ourselves. Somebody once said "It is incredibly easy to convince a man of something that he deep down wanted to believe anyway"
-
seesthesky
yawn - i won another small sum - the bet concerned the number of words i would receive in response - i guessed the correct range - strange bet, eh? -
saying that an approach to understanding or that a belief system announces one's epistemic naivety does
not constitue a derisive remark - i.e., it does not amount to ridicule -
it merely describes the uncritical acceptance of large amounts of accumulated data, the uncritical acceptance of methods of knowing and the failure to address or come to terms with the contradictions, fictions, and fallacies in that data and in those methods -
in fact it describes the way most people navigate through their universes of limited understanding - i.e., as humans we know practcally nothing - to learn we accumulate data and invent methods of understanding so that we may drawconclusions about that data - when we find a particular method of understaning workable because it proves reliable in predicting outcomes it becomes difficult to question that method of understanding - this appears to occur in all disciplines and all systems of knowing -
indeed, it is not uncommon in "hard" sciences to openly ignore data that might topple a theory because doing so might impede progress toward a goal unaffected by such data
"and, out of sheer curiosity, who would I attribute your thoughts to, other than you?"
i apparently deleted part of that sentence - i think i intended to communicate that my thoughts actually derived from minds mch greater than mine and from many disciplines -
"... well, if you are telling people how wrong they are and the very foundation of your justification is based on bad science, well, maybe you deserve a little derision?"
point to a specific statement of mine which constitutes bad science please
"I addressed your point. Your starting premise is unsupported and everything else in your post depends upon that premise."
please explain to me how my premise is unsupported - a mere announcement from you that my premise has no support does not prove your point
"I do have doubts that you would recognise a 'well established principles of physics' even if you were accelerating at 9.8m/s/s."
what does g - the acceleration of gravity (i should say the alleged acceleration of gravity) - have to do with this discussion?
"Keep your pathetic fantasies to yourself, they don't impress me. Simply prove what you say"
abbadon, you, in your responses, have proven what i said - thanks -
LittleToe
SeesTheSky:
Your condescending manner certainly won't earn you any friends.Which Mandamas are you working on?
LLL
-
Abaddon
Sirona;
Ah, I don't mean you; you manage to balance things quite well and I;m glad our respect is mutual for all our oppositional paradigms.
You're a little off with this. I don't think anyone should or shouldn't believe anything.
I think I need you to state that more precisely; people DO 'need' to believe things; fire is hot, killing is bad, etc.
I can only say what I believe, and I believe it based on my own *subjective* experience.
Ah, but we all now how flawed and inaccurate that can be; how do you compensate?
I think that we all see the world in different ways so what is right for one person isn't always right for another. Therefore, if someone tells me they believe that they are visited by a pink bunny every time its going to rain, then I'm not going to demand proof of that. If they say that I should believe in the pink bunny, then I'll respectfully say that I have my own beliefs based on my own experience and learning.
Different paradigms; yours is nod and smile quietly to yourself, mine is PROVE IT!!!! Both are needed.
seesthesky;
yawn - i won another small sum - the bet concerned the number of words i would receive in response - i guessed the correct range - strange bet, eh? -
Your grip on reality is disturbingly tenuous. I doubt there are people who would exchange body fluids with you, let alone make wagers with you. Is your yawning sense of inadequacy assuaged by such pretences?
saying that an approach to understanding or that a belief system announces one's epistemic naivety does
not constitue a derisive remark - i.e., it does not amount to ridicule -Ah, I understand; if you use long words when being derisive it doesn't count as ridicule. Hahahahahaha. Maybe I call a spade a spade whilst you prefer to call it a man-powered earth moving impliment?
>snip<
Now wipe your keyboard...
indeed, it is not uncommon in "hard" sciences to openly ignore data that might topple a theory because doing so might impede progress toward a goal unaffected by such data
If the theory can be toppled by data then there is usually no goal that can be achieved with regard to that theory, as data that could topple it obviously indiactes a problem with the theory. Cold Fusion, for example. I think you are making out that something happens that doesn't happen because of a profound misconception on your part.
"and, out of sheer curiosity, who would I attribute your thoughts to, other than you?"
i apparently deleted part of that sentence - i think i intended to communicate that my thoughts actually derived from minds mch greater than mine and from many disciplines -
Yes, of course you did... golly, the Discovey Channel is a double edged sword, isn't it?
please explain to me how my premise is unsupported - a mere announcement from you that my premise has no support does not prove your point.
I have. Shall I pop over and read it to you?
'Time and space do not, as far as we know, constitute matter.'
We already know that this may be totally wrong, thus falls the rest of your 'point'.
what does g - the acceleration of gravity (i should say the alleged acceleration of gravity) - have to do with this discussion?
A joke which is all the funnier by your inability to get it.