Posts by logansrun

19

I got a Professional Opinion of 'Great Teacher' book.

by lisaBObeesa in

(i did put this post on the other thread, but it is so far back on the thread i thought i would post it on it's own, too.

i showed page 170 and 171 of this book to a therapist i know to get her opinion.

i did not ask if i could quote her on the internet, so i will not give her name.

Part 2 of "Apostate Logical Fallacies"

by logansrun in

jw
friends

apostate logical fallacies part 2 of 2

in my first essay on common fallacies former jehovahs witnesses commit in reference to the society i explained the error of generalizing individual witness behavior to that of the entire society.

the other errors i notice (to a certain degree i realize they are my opinions) are related to this, yet somewhat different.

Ah, well it didn't take much to finally get on your curmudgeony side did it? Actually, I feel "priveledged" to finally rouse the ire of the Mighty Farkel. Now, let me show you why you are wrong (for the most part).

Technically, of course, you are correct that my use of the term "logical fallacies" is not accurate. I am well aware of this. But, certainly you are aware that terms have more than just their formal meaning, especially in the eyes of the public. Since there are numerous assertions about Jehovah's Witnesses on this forum that I feel (you do not?) are incorrect or overblown, I have called this fallacious. In hindsight I could have chosen better words. Big deal.

Actually a careful reading of Websters Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary will show the following:

Argument: 1 an outward sign: INDICATION 2 a: a reason given in proof or rebuttel b: discourse intended to persuade....4: an abstract or summary esp. of a literary work

Argumentation 1: the act or process of forming reasons and of drawing conclusions and applying them to a case in discussion 2: DEBATE, DISCUSSION

Fallacy 1 GUILE, TRICKERY b : deceptive appearance 2 a a false or mistaken idea b: erroneous or fallacious character

So, in reality I did not use any of te above terms incorrectly. There is formal and informal logic. I believe (although I am not certain) that I was using the latter. Oh, you also asked (told?) me to look up the word "essay." I did.

Essay: ...3 a: an analytic or interpretative literary composition usu. dealing with its subject from a limited or personal point of view b: something resembling such a composition

So, I feel I was also correct in calling my post an "essay." In the past I've had other posts in this format and a very respected member here refferred to it as an "essay." What was your point again?

Farkel, I like you. I think your posts can be very funny at times and you obviously are an intelligent fellow. But, in your efforts to to battle illogic you yourself become illogical. May I suggest you look up the term ad hominem?

Anyway, just like Francois you have done nothing to actually discuss the content of my post. You have simply nit-picked at terms and found fault with my informal usage of words. I find it rather curious that this appears to be the totality of your thoughts on the matter.

Farkel I think you're probably an over-all good guy. Like I said your posts on the JWs are some of the most hilarious I've seen, although I certainly wouldn't use them in a formal debate with a JW. I do feel you should tone down your "first strike" attacks on posters who did nothing to offend you whatsoever. Really, don't be like the asshole elders some of us dealt with. Rise above.

Bradley

66

Part 2 of "Apostate Logical Fallacies"

by logansrun in

jw
friends

apostate logical fallacies part 2 of 2

in my first essay on common fallacies former jehovahs witnesses commit in reference to the society i explained the error of generalizing individual witness behavior to that of the entire society.

the other errors i notice (to a certain degree i realize they are my opinions) are related to this, yet somewhat different.

logansrun

LOL six

66

Part 2 of "Apostate Logical Fallacies"

by logansrun in

jw
friends

apostate logical fallacies part 2 of 2

in my first essay on common fallacies former jehovahs witnesses commit in reference to the society i explained the error of generalizing individual witness behavior to that of the entire society.

the other errors i notice (to a certain degree i realize they are my opinions) are related to this, yet somewhat different.

logansrun

I'm going to bed now, people. Gooooood niiiighhht

Bradley (I hope I don't wake up with the bloody head of a horse at my feet)

66

Part 2 of "Apostate Logical Fallacies"

by logansrun in

jw
friends

apostate logical fallacies part 2 of 2

in my first essay on common fallacies former jehovahs witnesses commit in reference to the society i explained the error of generalizing individual witness behavior to that of the entire society.

the other errors i notice (to a certain degree i realize they are my opinions) are related to this, yet somewhat different.

logansrun

I like you Reborn,

Okay logan, you wanna play, let's play.
I do not think he is akin to Hitler (Hitler!) though. Don't change the subject from the JWs to the Nazis.
Forgive me if I am wrong, but it was YOU who brought up Hitler in your initial post. I was simply responding to the comments you made. Hitler was evil, but he did things for the benefit of the German economy. Does this qualify him as redeemable?

My original post included a reference to Hitler which was meant as a contrast to the JWs. Although there are certain similarities I would not equate the two as being equivalently evil. Not by a long shot.

Do you believe they do this because they just want them to die? Or do they actually believe they are doing the will of God by having such a policy? Think.
Do they want them to die? In all fairness, I would hope not. However as Lady Lee stated these people are collateral damage because the preservation of the image of the organization takes priority at all costs. Does that make them bloodguilty? You betcha. It is well established fact that Jehovah's Witnesses and the Watchtower Society have doctines such as organ transplants and blood transfusions which kill people every year. Do they actually believe they are doing the will of God by having such a policy? Possibly, but it makes them no less bloodguilty. Jim Jones, David Koresh, and Osama Bin Laden think they are doing God's will also. Does this make their actions forgivable or in need of someone to rationalize for them? Think Bradley.

There is a qualitative difference between Jim Jones, Koresh and Bin Laden with the WTS. I don't think I need to expound on this point since it is self-evident to anyone reasonable.

I originally said:
Then who are you to allege and present that they necessarily believe what they preach?
to which you replied:
Who are you to say they don't.
You initially made the assertion, therefore the burden of proof lies upon you to prove your statement. Alas, you or I cannot. Therefore they remain opinion. We can only look to which opinion makes more sense. Yours does not.

You totally ignored my reference to Ray Franz. That's my source and I'm sticking to it. What's your source?

You quoted me as saying:
Faith healers travel from town to town setting up tents conducting circus acts touching people while claiming to cure them of cancer and any other ailment. Do they necessarily believe what they are doing? Of course not, they know they are fake. But to the public, they present themselves as legitimate. Why? In the name of the almighty dollar.
I see you conveniently made a sweeping generalization of my comment as merely "emotionalized rubbish." I notice you did not attempt to refute what I said as an analogy as incorrect. How convenient. Insult something, but provide no legitimate foundation for your comments. Your credibility here is dwindling.

Forgive me, I edited the "emotionalized rubbish" part. That was wrong and "emotional rubbish" on my part . I also added that the analogy is incorrect, in my opinion. You cannot honestly compare a well established corporation with some fly-by-night preacher. Both might be wrong (and I believe they are) but the comparison is not a strong one.

The Watchtower Society is one of the most lucrative religious companies in the world. According to Newsday magazine in the September 23rd, 2002 issue, in the year 2001 the Watchtower Society posted $951,000,000 in revenue, that year alone.

This is quite something and I would love to get some further comment on this. I'm bad with fiscal matters, but is this 951 million before or after operating expenses? You mean that's all profit? Help me out on this one, kay?

Rank-and-file members are deceived and abused, and continually encouraged to continue peddling magazines. Publishers are asked to donate for the literature received, then householders are asked to donate for literature placed in the field ministry. 951 million dollars a year with Bethelites performing free slave labor, yet you claim it is not about the money? Again I say, get real.

Calling Bethelites "slaves" is a little over the top, imho. Anyway, I'm not saying they are not abusive - THEY ARE. But, I do feel that this board does not present the most unbiased and balanced view of the JWs. I stand by this. Your comments are appreciated, though. I do admit that part of this is for me is playing the part of "Devil's advocate." I feel that is a good thing, though. Bradley

66

Part 2 of "Apostate Logical Fallacies"

by logansrun in

jw
friends

apostate logical fallacies part 2 of 2

in my first essay on common fallacies former jehovahs witnesses commit in reference to the society i explained the error of generalizing individual witness behavior to that of the entire society.

the other errors i notice (to a certain degree i realize they are my opinions) are related to this, yet somewhat different.

logansrun

Big Tex,

No, I don't "know it all." Actually, you are starting a sort of straw-man argument here by implying that I think I know it all and am a sort of smarty-pants upstart whippersnapper . Pretty easy to disagree with someone like that.

But, you're wrong.

Actually, the more I learn the more I realize how much I don't know. All the same, I strongly believe that what I've said in my post has a lot of truth in it. Let's stick to the subject instead shall we?

Bradley

66

Part 2 of "Apostate Logical Fallacies"

by logansrun in

jw
friends

apostate logical fallacies part 2 of 2

in my first essay on common fallacies former jehovahs witnesses commit in reference to the society i explained the error of generalizing individual witness behavior to that of the entire society.

the other errors i notice (to a certain degree i realize they are my opinions) are related to this, yet somewhat different.

logansrun

Big Tex

It has only been recently that I have begun to appreciate the shades of gray to all those black and white answers. And how rarely a simple answer really solves a complex problem.
The beginning of wisdom is the realization of how little one actually knows.

I find it rather amusing that you are taking an adverserial tone to my post and then write the above. My thread was started to show how there is a lot of "gray" in dealing with the JWs that most people are ready to just name "black." Here I'm the one saying that the situation is not as simple as either the WT or ex-JWs say it is, you disagree with my post and then state that "how rarely a simple answer really solves a complex problem." Does anyone else see the paradox in this?

Bradley

24

WTS conspires to shield confessed mass-murderer and felon from authorities!

by reporter in

jw
friends

my questions are (besides the obvious): who is going to take the rap eventually for these heretofore unsolved florida murders?

whose innocent lives may yet rot in jail while this now baptized perpetrator goes free to share in field service and attend meetings?

whose victims' families are hoping in vain that this baptized felon gets caught while he is being shielded from "secular" prosecution?

logansrun

Where did this letter come from? How did it get into your possession Reporter? Were you an elder dealing with the case? Do you have the original copy of the letter?

Bradley

66

Part 2 of "Apostate Logical Fallacies"

by logansrun in

jw
friends

apostate logical fallacies part 2 of 2

in my first essay on common fallacies former jehovahs witnesses commit in reference to the society i explained the error of generalizing individual witness behavior to that of the entire society.

the other errors i notice (to a certain degree i realize they are my opinions) are related to this, yet somewhat different.

logansrun

Ravyn,

I appreciate your post. Obviously, you have first-hand knowledge of things that many of us do not. I certainly would be more than interested in hearing about some of the cover-ups, especially the one involving murder! All the same, I still believe that people go "over the top" on some of their criticisms of the Society. In fact, I know this to be true.

Thank you, though.

Bradley

66

Part 2 of "Apostate Logical Fallacies"

by logansrun in

jw
friends

apostate logical fallacies part 2 of 2

in my first essay on common fallacies former jehovahs witnesses commit in reference to the society i explained the error of generalizing individual witness behavior to that of the entire society.

the other errors i notice (to a certain degree i realize they are my opinions) are related to this, yet somewhat different.

logansrun

Reborn,

Thank you for your...ahem..objective and unemotional response.

You said:

Have you ever actually personally spoken to Ted Jaracz or seen him in interviews? You say Hitler was an evil man. As Fuhrer of the German government he did manage to balance the budget. Does this make him redeemable? Of course not.

I've had the occassion to listen to TJ speak as well as heard, what I feel to be, reliable reports about him. I believe he comes closest to being the "worst" GB member since Judge Rutherford. He's arrogant, cold-hearted and heavy handed. I do not think he is akin to Hitler (Hitler!) though. Don't change the subject from the JWs to the Nazis.

The Governing Body members knowingly support doctrines such as the blood issue (the case of organ transplants also comes to mind) which vacillate every few years and knowingly kill innocent people.

Do you believe they do this because they just want them to die? Or do they actually believe they are doing the will of God by having such a policy? Think.

Have you ever personally met members of the GB?

Yes I have. I met Lyman Swingle briefly at an assembly some years ago. Seemed like a gentle fellow.

Then who are you to allege and present that they necessarily believe what they preach?

Who are you to say they don't. Also, I've read Crisis of Conscience and think Ray Franz is a very frank and trustworthy fellow. He himself said that most members of the GB are kindly sorts of men (although there were evidently some exceptions). He also called them "victims of victims." Since he had first hand knowledge of the inner workings of this executive council I tend to believe what he says. The picture he paints is of a misguided group of zealots who honestly believe they are God's organization. Have you actually read CoC or do you disagree with Ray?

With all the cushy perks of having millions worship you as a god (if you try to deny the worship of GB members and FDS, then you expose your flawed logic yet again and do not know JW's very well) and have housing, food, clothing, and transportation all provided... why give up that power, prestige, and comfort? Faith healers travel from town to town setting up tents conducting circus acts touching people while claiming to cure them of cancer and any other ailment. Do they necessarily believe what they are doing? Of course not, they know they are fake. But to the public, they present themselves as legitimate. Why? In the name of the almighty dollar.
Get real.

Your thinking on this matter is very two-dimensional. I cannot honestly compare the JWs to traveling circus preachers. It's a whole different beast entirely. Don't get me wrong, I think they are totally loopey about many things and have caused much harm, but I simply do not think your comparisons (to the Nazis and faith-healers) are good analogys.

Bradley