I'm pretty sure Nick is an INTJ. Sorry in advance if I am totally wrong.
Sab, you are most definitely more observant than others in here. I am a borderline I/ENTJ.
Nickolas
JoinedPosts by Nickolas
-
363
So me, of all people, had a religious experience
by sabastious ini was sitting in my garage, as i often do, to chill out and i actually ended up becoming angry.. so here i am, in my garage, kicking it on the stool for the drum set that is in there (i am a pianist/composer, not a drummer).
i start to think about all the crazy stuff that transpires on this planet.
we have all seen shows and heard stories or maybe even witnessed events that don't add up.
-
-
-
363
So me, of all people, had a religious experience
by sabastious ini was sitting in my garage, as i often do, to chill out and i actually ended up becoming angry.. so here i am, in my garage, kicking it on the stool for the drum set that is in there (i am a pianist/composer, not a drummer).
i start to think about all the crazy stuff that transpires on this planet.
we have all seen shows and heard stories or maybe even witnessed events that don't add up.
-
-
Nickolas
Are you having a bad day, Robdar?
-
363
So me, of all people, had a religious experience
by sabastious ini was sitting in my garage, as i often do, to chill out and i actually ended up becoming angry.. so here i am, in my garage, kicking it on the stool for the drum set that is in there (i am a pianist/composer, not a drummer).
i start to think about all the crazy stuff that transpires on this planet.
we have all seen shows and heard stories or maybe even witnessed events that don't add up.
-
-
Nickolas
And so it continues, Robdar. Yes, I jumped to the conclusion that you were male. I do sincerely apologise. I made the same mistake with journeyon. I tend to be more circumspect when I am addressing women, call it chivalrous romanticism. Men seem (I use the word "seem" a lot, if you've noticed, because I try not to express surety when I can't know for sure) to display the same kind of aggression you do.
Yes, my statements to brotherdan and journeyon were ad hominem but they were expressed in terms of impressions. As you rise to perceived attacks on your friends, I respond in kind to perceived attacks on me. In terms of vitriol, however, I take off my hat to you.
I am not an intellectual and never claimed to be, and I make no claims to wisdom. This is a conclusion to which you yourself have jumped, since you claim to know what I think. On the contrary, I am constantly reminded and humbled by how little I know. I value and admire people who take the time to educate me, except those who do so in a manner that resembles rubbing my face in it, like how some folks train puppies by rubbing theirs in the excrement they left in the corner.
Yes, I have used cannabis in the past. Quite a lot of it, actually. You evidently took my comments to be critical or untruthful when they were not.
If you should choose not to communicate with me again, Robdar, I wouldn't be offended.
-
49
"We are all atheists ...
by Nickolas in... about most of the gods that societies have ever believed in.
some of us just go one god further.".
dawkins raises a point which some, if not many, theists will dismiss as irrelevant, but i am not exactly sure why.
-
-
Nickolas
Hi there, Nickolas. I realize that these labels are not derogatory but they are not always helpful either. As humans, with the power of speech, we tend to try to reduce everything to words. This is essential on a forum like this. However some things cannot be appreciated or explained through words.
No disagreement here, trevor. Language has many limitations, particularly when it is solely in text form, as it is in forums like this. To get a more complete understanding of what is being conveyed in a conversation, one needs to be in the same room as the person talking. Otherwise you miss the subtle vocal inflections, facial expressions and body language that augments the message. The #1 cause of misunderstandings in text conversations is this.
so then, nikolas, if babies are atheists at birth, where on the scale of 1-10 would you locate them. Is dawkins saying that lack of specific knowledge is lack of belief. There is something wrong here but I can't quite put my finger on it.
SBC answered this question very well (I was out to visit the dentist). And, per his post previous to that one, I will hope and trust that Tammy will not take my deist comment as offensive, if only because she is less inclined to take offense than most. If it is off base it is off base and I am quite ok with being corrected on it. Thanks for paving the way, SBC.
-
49
"We are all atheists ...
by Nickolas in... about most of the gods that societies have ever believed in.
some of us just go one god further.".
dawkins raises a point which some, if not many, theists will dismiss as irrelevant, but i am not exactly sure why.
-
-
Nickolas
In his book, " the irrational atheist", Vox Day
I will read it, thanks, and do my best not to dismiss what he has to say when he goes off topic with character attacks.
-
363
So me, of all people, had a religious experience
by sabastious ini was sitting in my garage, as i often do, to chill out and i actually ended up becoming angry.. so here i am, in my garage, kicking it on the stool for the drum set that is in there (i am a pianist/composer, not a drummer).
i start to think about all the crazy stuff that transpires on this planet.
we have all seen shows and heard stories or maybe even witnessed events that don't add up.
-
-
Nickolas
Seems the thread has gone quiet. Before I leave it, a few personal impressions about the dynamic.
It has been generally a good conversation that shed some light on some things but there was obviously also some heat generated. I will accept ownership for that part of it that was mine. I was particularly blunt with journeyon and to some extent brotherdan. I certainly could have been more diplomatic and circumspect, and I will strive to better control my miserable, cantankerous and intolerent nature in future. However, my responses to these two contributors, however strong they might have been, were in reaction to what I perceived as ad hominem attacks against the characters of some of the contributors to this thread, including me, rather than attacks on the ideas they were presenting. I will allow that both contributors had something valid to say, however, whereas every one of Robdar's posts was an ad hominem attack contributing absolutely nothing to the conversation, with the exception of his last post, in which he is letting us know he was going to get stoned. I think you have something to say, brotherdan and journeyon and I am genuinely interested in hearing it, just not the overgeneralisations about skeptics and others who are on a different page from you.
Thanks for the thread, Sab.
-
49
"We are all atheists ...
by Nickolas in... about most of the gods that societies have ever believed in.
some of us just go one god further.".
dawkins raises a point which some, if not many, theists will dismiss as irrelevant, but i am not exactly sure why.
-
-
Nickolas
I've read it and I, obviously, don't agree.
Yup, that's why I thought about you as I read it. The thesis that faith does harm to the world would be an interesting topic for another thread.
-
49
"We are all atheists ...
by Nickolas in... about most of the gods that societies have ever believed in.
some of us just go one god further.".
dawkins raises a point which some, if not many, theists will dismiss as irrelevant, but i am not exactly sure why.
-
-
Nickolas
Labels are not helpful because not every thing in the universe, or our mind, can be nailed down and finalised.
Hey there, trevor. Labels in this context are a sort of shorthand, they narrow the field in such a way that understanding is facilitated. What you are describing in your first paragraph, for example, is pantheism, which Dawkins describes as "sexed-up atheism". Tammy in her rejection of conventional religious teaching is approaching deism. None of these labels is derogatory.
-
49
"We are all atheists ...
by Nickolas in... about most of the gods that societies have ever believed in.
some of us just go one god further.".
dawkins raises a point which some, if not many, theists will dismiss as irrelevant, but i am not exactly sure why.
-
-
Nickolas
In either case, I am not religious...
I'm puzzled by your statement, Tammy. How can you believe in Jesus but not be religious? Is it that you do not follow any organised religion?
There is a minor misconception that "monotheists" don't believe in any other Gods.
Hey there, PSacramento. It's been awhile. I thought of you a number of times recently while reading Sam Harris' End of Faith. Are you familiar with it?
I've always wondered about that, your point I mean. I was raised Roman Catholic, and we not only had "three persons in one God" (which in itself suggests polytheism), we had Mary, 'Queen of Heaven' to whom we prayed as much as to her son, 5,120 saints to whom we prayed selectively, the four Choirs of Angelic Hosts, arrayed in nine orders: Seraphim, Cherubim, Thrones, Dominions, Virtues, Powers, Principalities, Archangels and your everyday run-of-the-mill Angels, including our Guardian Angels (who, as a child, I would ask to turn aside while I went to the bathroom). Yet, we were told there was only one God. If ever there was a so very obvious example of modern mythicism, the Roman Catholic Church is it. All Abrahamic religions (which also claim to be monotheisitic) have there various supernatural creatures, too. But forget about all those other lesser branches of the tree. If you deny the existence of the tree, you deny the existence of the branches, too.
-
49
"We are all atheists ...
by Nickolas in... about most of the gods that societies have ever believed in.
some of us just go one god further.".
dawkins raises a point which some, if not many, theists will dismiss as irrelevant, but i am not exactly sure why.
-
-
Nickolas
I continue very much to enjoy your repartee, Tammy. There is just no substitute for maturity and intelligence in conversation, and you have both in spades. Both of your points are valid.
Do you think it possible that modern theists have wrong the nature and/or personality of the current Creator they believe in? I guess a different way of posing that question is, if there is a Creator of the universe, might it not be Yahweh? A person who allows the possibility of there being a Creator of the universe but who does not assign an identity to it is generally thought of as a deist, which is a different kettle of fish.
Yes, we are all born non-evolutionists, but the difference is that evolutionary theory is a field of science subject to evidentiary challenges and counter-challenges. Religion tolerates neither.