Retrovirus

Joined

• started 11 topics
• posted 713 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Retrovirus

• 
  104

  Farewell

  by EdenOne in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  "don't be dismayed by good-byes.

  a farewell is necessary before you can meet again.

  and meeting again, after moments or lifetimes, is certain for those who are friends.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Retrovirus

  All the very best to you both, Eden, I'm also finding a better fit elsewhere. Good luck to all on your individual journeys!

  Retro
• 
  372

  On respect for the belief of others. Sorry for the long post

  by StarTrekAngel in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i am inclined to start this thread in response to some comments made in other threads.

  i have been coming around these forum for quite some time now so whatever you find in here is not just related to something someone may have said this week.

  it can go months back as well.. i have seen many who claim to respect the belief of others but when it comes down to applying it into practice, things take a whole different tune.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Retrovirus

  Cofty,

  Firstly, although the OP does not mention theology, the topic it is under can be regarded as the context. Lucky I only whispered, but no strawman, agreed.

  Second “bad ideas”. If an idea or belief is asserted as reality on a religious forum it is of course open to debate. But the term “bad ideas” is still a tad Orwellian and intimidating. After all, positing unconventional ideas as theorems is a necessary part of scientific advance.

  Thirdly, my alleged “obsession with tone”. No apologies, that is indeed the main issue for me. Debate is one thing, but using putdowns and assumptions of authority and/or superior understanding will intimidate people struggling to rebuild their ideas and many whose first language is not English. Worse, these tactics encourage other posters to go the step further to name-calling and outright insults.

  IMO, calling the debate “robust” or “vigorous” in no way justifies such tactics.

  “ridiculing” is actually a bit more difficult. Reductio ad absurdum is a valid form of argument, but ridicule is also very likely to evoke a personal reaction, and therefore risky at best. Risky, that is, if the aim is to get a person to think beyond his/her boundaries, rather than to ‘win’.

  Happy to discuss further if you wish, Retro.
• 
  372

  On respect for the belief of others. Sorry for the long post

  by StarTrekAngel in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i am inclined to start this thread in response to some comments made in other threads.

  i have been coming around these forum for quite some time now so whatever you find in here is not just related to something someone may have said this week.

  it can go months back as well.. i have seen many who claim to respect the belief of others but when it comes down to applying it into practice, things take a whole different tune.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Retrovirus

  For Phizzy and Cofty:

  Lawd forbid that an iggorant farmgirl from a former penal colony should bore Your Wisdom!

  That was the succinct and anti-tedium bit J. Detail next post.

  Retro
• 
  30

  Handing out candy

  by mikeypants in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  growing up my parents would barricade our home off by parking vehicles bumper to bumper - you would have to crawl under the cars or over the bumpers to get to our door.

  also, we would turn off all the lights and hide in the back room away from the street.. that was the norm for me.

  isnt that insane?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Retrovirus

  Ha, Smiddy, I always got a few visits, but other houses around got more. This time I carved a pumpkin and put it on the porch, bingo! ran out of goodies.

  Next year I plan to try a ghost!
• 
  372

  On respect for the belief of others. Sorry for the long post

  by StarTrekAngel in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i am inclined to start this thread in response to some comments made in other threads.

  i have been coming around these forum for quite some time now so whatever you find in here is not just related to something someone may have said this week.

  it can go months back as well.. i have seen many who claim to respect the belief of others but when it comes down to applying it into practice, things take a whole different tune.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Retrovirus

  Cofty

  Personal "experience" is by definition subjective and does not count as objective evidence

  Exactly. But that does not mean it cannot or should not contribute to a person's belief system

  So what's your point? The scientific method discovers new things every day. Theology hasn't added a single thing to the sum total of human knowledge in thousands of years

  I thought this was about respect for beliefs rather than theology. Dare i whisper 'strawman'?

  I do unless the person is trying to also pretend their beliefs are true.

  Good. But we are well beyond the over-simplification of 'truth' as the watchtower uses it, I hope. In fact, if the person is trying to force beliefs on others as 'truth', I would agree with you

  I have no idea what you just said but your obsession with "tone" is tedious in the extreme.

  Perhaps you are tired. Let's continue another time.
• 
  372

  On respect for the belief of others. Sorry for the long post

  by StarTrekAngel in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i am inclined to start this thread in response to some comments made in other threads.

  i have been coming around these forum for quite some time now so whatever you find in here is not just related to something someone may have said this week.

  it can go months back as well.. i have seen many who claim to respect the belief of others but when it comes down to applying it into practice, things take a whole different tune.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Retrovirus

  TS100

  Belief changes but evidence does not! Science evolves with understanding of new discoveries not new light.

  I entirely agree with your point as I understand it. The misuse of 'new light' by the Watchtower is a joke.

  'Evidence' - by which I mean reproducible results given the same experimental conditions - does not change, but can be refined and the accepted theories for the results can change.
• 
  372

  On respect for the belief of others. Sorry for the long post

  by StarTrekAngel in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i am inclined to start this thread in response to some comments made in other threads.

  i have been coming around these forum for quite some time now so whatever you find in here is not just related to something someone may have said this week.

  it can go months back as well.. i have seen many who claim to respect the belief of others but when it comes down to applying it into practice, things take a whole different tune.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Retrovirus

  Cofty

  Our beliefs should be commensurate with the evidence. That is what it means to be rational.

  There's the issue that I see. There is simply no existing 'evidence' that one person would accept for what another person might have seen or experienced. Plus the 'evidence' provided by science evolves over time.

  I understand that you do not take into consideration whether or not the belief is beneficial to the believer and those around her/him?

  Before you go any further constructing a straw man please go back and read my first post on this thread on page 1 carefully.

  Now this is what I'd call a bit over-'robust'. Not quite an ad-hominem, but perhaps a beginners attempt at mind-reading?
• 
  372

  On respect for the belief of others. Sorry for the long post

  by StarTrekAngel in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i am inclined to start this thread in response to some comments made in other threads.

  i have been coming around these forum for quite some time now so whatever you find in here is not just related to something someone may have said this week.

  it can go months back as well.. i have seen many who claim to respect the belief of others but when it comes down to applying it into practice, things take a whole different tune.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Retrovirus

  Exactly, Peacefulpete.

  So if I go up to a couple of JW elders at a cart and ask them how they justify their history of false prophecy that is a form of assault is it?

  If you ask for information on the basis of their beliefs, it's neither attack nor assault. It all depends on how, er, "robust" your questioning is.

  Also, Cofty, it would be helpful if you would define your use of "bad beliefs".

  thanks, Retro
• 
  24

  Blondie's Comments You Will Not Hear at the 10-11-2015 WT Study (EXPECTATION)

  by blondie in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  blondies highlights from the10-11-2015 wt study (august 15, 2015), pages (14-18) .

  for pictures see this link.

  opening comments.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Retrovirus

  I wonder how "having a zealous share in the peaching work" can equate to sitting near a trolley avoiding eye contact. . .
• 
  70

  If you could name the theme of an assembly what would it be???

  by karter in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  divine boredom.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Retrovirus

  Let's give Jehovah a rest! The FDS will do it all.