Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The thing that is so frustrating for me is not that "I am a know-it-all, condescending a-hole." I do not know-it-all (but I know a hell of a lot) and I am not condescending (but I suffer ignorant fools badly). The truly frustrating thing for me about those who choose to debate with me is the utter unwillingness (or perhaps incapacity) to release preconceptions about "God" or "No God" . . . or whatever. You asked above what changed most for me. It was the requirement to abandon ALL my preconceptions and start from scratch to re-perceive and try to understand our reality. I had to vet everything from scratch.
Mystic, I wanted to respond to this in all sincerity and hope it will be received the same way. If you are serious about wondering why you are perceived a certain way, you should reread your posts as if they come from someone else. It is not in the content of what you are trying to say, it is in the style and the asides that you project something you evidently don't mean to.
These sort of quotes and phrases:
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
Interesting post, Jaymax. Well done.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
I find this quite a hopeful development for you, Jaymax. If you pursue the meditation route diligently and assiduously . . . you may reach the same state I did and "know" the truth.
and even your asides in the first quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
I do not know-it-all (but I know a hell of a lot) and I am not condescending (but I suffer ignorant fools badly).
emphasis added
convey the tone of a instructor delivering TRUTH as opposed to someone debating ideas with peers, and are a difficult combination of condescending, patronizing, and defensive. If you were able to reduce those elements in your writing style, I think you would find much more interest in discussion, although it is no guarantee that your ideas would get any more traction. They might, however, get a more equitable hearing...
Just my thoughts, take them or leave them.
-NoCapo
P.S. The thread is very interesting but I don't have a background in constructivism, so I am mostly a spectator.
Or like little boys with new toys showing them off to everyone and telling every other kid their toy is better.
Who's position/view is one supposed to put forth on this forum...if not their own?
ALL present their opinion as "the way it is"...would you suggest to do otherwise?
I am a very pragmatic person...I see "facts" as being equated to "what is".
Of course...many can view the same issue, and no two will come up with seeing exactly the same thing...so, we all present our own "reality" and our own "take" as to "what is", based upon how we assimilate things.
Most issues on a "Religion & Spirituality" board are going to be subjective matters...and the basis of the arguments will be our "opinions".
Naturally, each will present their "opinion" on their side of the debate...and argue it's merit and validity from their own perspective.
But, to ever insult someone and say their view "reeks of arrogance and special privilege"...because you see a matter from an opposing viewpoint...THAT is what "reeks of arrogance and special privilege".
ALL here, Believer and Non-Believer alike, present what they see as "truth". Do they not?
ANY that have an opposing view could say...Those on the "other side", by simply debating what they feel are the merits of their perspective, are acting "like little boys with new toys showing them off to everyone and telling every other kid their toy is better".
If this is the attitude one is going to cop about the opposing view...a decent debate is futile.
Mystic, I wanted to respond to this in all sincerity and hope it will be received the same way. If you are serious about wondering why you are perceived a certain way, you should reread your posts as if they come from someone else. It is not in the content of what you are trying to say, it is in the style and the asides that you project something you evidently don't mean to. These sort of quotes and phrases and even your asides in the first quote convey the tone of a instructor delivering TRUTH as opposed to someone debating ideas with peers, and are a difficult combination of condescending, patronizing, and defensive. If you were able to reduce those elements in your writing style, I think you would find much more interest in discussion, although it is no guarantee that your ideas would get any more traction. They might, however, get a more equitable hearing...
Thank you, No Capo. I appreciate your sincerity and desire to help. The tone you refer to is the result of 30+ years as a University Professor. We tend to develop habits of speech related to our professions . . . and teaching as an authority was mine. Believe it or not, I have made an effort to tone it down and be less authoritative because I do NOT want to teach . . . just witness to my understanding. Clearly I am not doing a very good job of it.
The truly frustrating thing for me about those who choose to debate with me is the utter unwillingness (or perhaps incapacity) to release preconceptions about "God" or "No God" . . .
I am not sure that not accepting _your_ preconceptions and assertions is the same as being unwilling to release our own. In fact I have no such preconceptions _to_ release for example. My opinion is that we are in a state of ignorance about the explanations for our existence here in this universe and we need to explore hypotheses to explain it. "God" is just one of those hypotheses and I am as willing to consider that one as any other.
To consider it however I have to be given the evidence that supports it. Not just assertions - poor linguistic attempts to define "god" into existence before loading that definition with a plethora of similarly evidence free side claims - dubious claims about experiences during meditation that one wants to put forward as if they constitute evidence - and declarations that you "know" the truth when the back up suggests anything but.
Who's position/view is one supposed to put forth on this forum...if not their own?
ALL present their opinion as "the way it is"...would you suggest to do otherwise?
I am a very pragmatic person...I see "facts" as being equated to "what is".
Of course...many can view the same issue, and no two will come up with seeing exactly the same thing...so, we all present our own "reality" and our own "take" as to "what is", based upon how we assimilate things.
Most issues on a "Religion & Spirituality" board are going to be subjective matters...and the basis of the arguments will be our "opinions".
Naturally, each will present their "opinion" on their side of the debate...and argue it's merit and validity from their own perspective.
But, to ever insult someone and say their view "reeks of arrogance and special privilege"...because you see a matter from an opposing viewpoint...THAT is what "reeks of arrogance and special privilege".
ALL here, Believer and Non-Believer alike, present what they see as "truth". Do they not?
ANY that have an opposing view could say...Those on the "other side", by simply debating what they feel are the merits of their perspective, are acting "like little boys with new toys showing them off to everyone and telling every other kid their toy is better".
If this is the attitude one is going to cop about the opposing view...a decent debate is futile.
Monumentus just explained it well. But, I might add that when one claims to have been provided a vision during meditation that is contrary to most others' opinions/beliefs, and one proclaims it as the "truth", how else can it be describes except as arrogance and special privilege? You want us to believe that God picked you to present his message of "truth", though millions of others have claim to receive another message from God that they believe is the "truth". Why should we believe you? Anecdotal evidence is not objective evidence and therefore cannot be considered credible.
Thank you, No Capo. I appreciate your sincerity and desire to help. The tone you refer to is the result of 30+ years as a University Professor. We tend to develop habits of speech related to our professions . . . and teaching as an authority was mine. Believe it or not, I have made an effort to tone it down and be less authoritative because I do NOT want to teach . . . just witness to my understanding. Clearly I am not doing a very good job of it.
I understand the difficulty in changing the way you communicate. I have a tendency to press for explanations and tear apart ideas, because in my profession that is how you ensure you have a robust design. When you take an idea, and rip out everything that is not necessary to achieve the stated goals, then you are approaching an elegant solution. It often comes across as nitpicky and combative, especially for folks that want to maintain a "big picture" outlook. For me, if the details are wrong, then the "Big Picture" is flawed. Ignoring flaws in the design doesn't help anyone, so there is no reason not to pound on the problems. It is how I approach any design problem, be it electronics or a philosophy. Self-awareness helps, but ultimately some of it isn't going to change. It is just how I think.
Anyway good luck on refining your personal communication style. It is something we all have to do, and is never simple.If only everyone would think like me...
Sorry, but I disavow the role of teacher, period. I believe we are all looking at the same world . . . so there is value in the way we see things. That is why I witness to my understanding. My driving motivation is a "love for God and each other". . . that's all.
The thing that is so frustrating for me is not that "I am a know-it-all, condescending a-hole." I do not know-it-all (but I know a hell of a lot) and I am not condescending (but I suffer ignorant fools badly). The truly frustrating thing for me about those who choose to debate with me is the utter unwillingness (or perhaps incapacity) to release preconceptions about "God" or "No God" . . . or whatever. You asked above what changed most for me. It was the requirement to abandon ALL my preconceptions and start from scratch to re-perceive and try to understand our reality. I had to vet everything from scratch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by monumentus
I am not sure that not accepting _your_ preconceptions and assertions is the same as being unwilling to release our own. In fact I have no such preconceptions _to_ release for example. My opinion is that we are in a state of ignorance about the explanations for our existence here in this universe and we need to explore hypotheses to explain it. "God" is just one of those hypotheses and I am as willing to consider that one as any other.
The issue is NOT accepting my preconceptions about God . . . it is abandoning the ones that do NOT apply to the God I believe in. You continue to do that as if they applied to my views and they do not. The entire history of Christianity is rife with preconceptions about God. I rejected every one of them and started from scratch. I use only those that are consistent with current scientific knowledge . . . that does not mean specifically evidenced by science. I am not concerned with YOUR preconceptions so much as the ones you attribute to ME and my view of God. You apply the traditional ones I specifically said I abandoned to start from scratch.
Quote:
To consider it however I have to be given the evidence that supports it. Not just assertions - poor linguistic attempts to define "god" into existence before loading that definition with a plethora of similarly evidence free side claims - dubious claims about experiences during meditation that one wants to put forward as if they constitute evidence - and declarations that you "know" the truth when the back up suggests anything but.
You do seem to have difficulty with the concept of witness. I am NOT making claims or trying to prove them with personal evidence. I am explaining my views and why I hold them as truth. The evidence necessary for ME to "know" anything may or may not correspond with what YOU need. I am not putting it forward as evidence for anyone but ME. That is what witnessing is all about . . . explaining my understanding and why.
The issue is NOT accepting my preconceptions about God . . . it is abandoning the ones that do NOT apply to the God I believe in. You continue to do that as if they applied to my views and they do not. The entire history of Christianity is rife with preconceptions about God. I rejected every one of them and started from scratch. I use only those that are consistent with current scientific knowledge . . . that does not mean specifically evidenced by science. I am not concerned with YOUR preconceptions so much as the ones you attribute to ME and my view of God. You apply the traditional ones I specifically said I abandoned to start from scratch.
You do seem to have difficulty with the concept of witness. I am NOT making claims or trying to prove them with personal evidence. I am explaining my views and why I hold them as truth. The evidence necessary for ME to "know" anything may or may not correspond with what YOU need. I am not putting it forward as evidence for anyone but ME. That is what witnessing is all about . . . explaining my understanding and why.
Why do you even provide your opinion if you have no evidence to demonstrate how you came to your conclusions as to the Truth or even the validity of your opinion? Would it not be easier simply to admit its blind faith and that evidence really doesn't matter? At least this would be more intellectually honest.
Why do you even provide your opinion if you have no evidence to demonstrate how you came to your conclusions as to the Truth or even the validity of your opinion? Would it not be easier simply to admit its blind faith and that evidence really doesn't matter? At least this would be more intellectually honest.
But it is far from blind faith. There is plenty of evidence for ME. The problem is in making it available to you or anyone else since it involves the acquisition of a great deal of knowledge about our reality and the development of right brain skills necessary to achieve deep meditation, etc. In short, unless you duplicate my journey over the past 40+ years . . . you may not have the same evidence I do, period. That is why I have explained as much as I can in my Synthesis. But much of the evidence is also personal experiences limited to ME. My witness is to explain why I hold the views I do . . . that's it.
Why do you even provide your opinion if you have no evidence to demonstrate how you came to your conclusions as to the Truth or even the validity of your opinion? Would it not be easier simply to admit its blind faith and that evidence really doesn't matter? At least this would be more intellectually honest.
You are right...forget "opinions", forget "faith"...yours, mine, or anybody elses. Go with your "evidence only" demand.
To facilitate this:
Check out the full & complete definition of "God"...in a way that eliminates bias, prejudice, confusion, or ignorance...like through some indepenent source known to provide definitions, such as Merriam-Webster.
Then, through solid evidence gained by way of direct observation, various genres of the Sciences, and the direct observation and information of the masses throughout the history of mankind...determine if there is, or has been, anything that falls within any definition of "God" given by the independent definer.
IF there is anything that can be objectively determined to exist, or has existed, that fits the definition...then God Exists and/or Existed. IF NOT...God Doesn't Exist and/or Never Existed.
Check that out and get back to us on what you have found to be the FACTS/EVIDENCE/PROOF of the matter.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
