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.
I don't see yours showing up either. Maybe it's mythical.
I wonder if it's some kind of Account setting? I can see a variety of things under most peoples' forum names. I guess Im part of the Illuminati and nobody told me my application went through.
just a preference, period. The ubiquitous use of "nature" or "natural" AS IF it ends the issues and explains ANYTHING is arrogant vanity and hubris . . . nothing more.
Still playing the "Since I have no evidence for my position I will just insult everyone around me" method then I see?
As the number of posts on this thread since my last post would indicate . . . I have indeed saved my fingers, Arequipa . . . waiting for ANY remotely intelligent and insightful answer to the inscrutable "Natural" that you all so frequently and mindlessly use as an "explanation." NONE has been forthcoming because none can be. There is no more answer for "Nature" than for God . . . just a preference, period. The ubiquitous use of "nature" or "natural" AS IF it ends the issues and explains ANYTHING is arrogant vanity and hubris . . . nothing more.
Quote:
Originally Posted by monumentus
Still playing the "Since I have no evidence for my position I will just insult everyone around me" method then I see?
Still having trouble comprehending the difference between characterizing ideas and insulting people, I see. It is the USE of "nature" and "natural" as EXPLANATIONS that is arrogant vanity and hubris. They explain NOTHING. They simply label what is . . . but so does God.
Mystic EVERYONE knows that this is just the Mystic dialect of Theist-talk for 'Anyone who does not accept my claims, theory and beliefs as fact because I say so is an idiot'. And nobody is more a better example of self - opinionated arrogance than you. You won't need me to repeat the merits of your theory but you do need me to repeat that it is you who have proven nothing and are in denial about the logical approach to data.
And don't try to embroil me in a discussion...it has been chased around the track too often, nor an exchange of personalities. I am no genius but I am too canny to fall into that trap.
Don't challenge my post and then ask not to be engaged. You put words in my mouth that I never said and then castigate me for it. Why is it you have nothing to prove to use the label "Nature" since it is equally inscrutable, Arequipa? By what logic does your label gain precedence over mine . . . which by the standard of precedent is a later label? God has been the label for as long as humans have considered such things. What exactly is the scientific "proof" you demand of me that justifies your change of label from God to "Nature?"
I have clarified previously that unchanging sets of attributes applied to a limited number of materials creates wholly predictable results. And that no outside influence is necessary. the fact that you find science not remotely intelligent or insightful, when it basically runs your life and allows you to be typing here, is simply a flaw in your own ability to understand.
Another of those who characterize my knowledge and attitude toward science from ignorance. I hardly "find science not remotely intelligent or insightful" because my Synthesis is based on a lengthy and deep immersion in it and its implications for our reality. Try reading it:
Still having trouble comprehending the difference between characterizing ideas and insulting people, I see. It is the USE of "nature" and "natural" as EXPLANATIONS that is arrogant vanity and hubris. They explain NOTHING. They simply label what is . . . but so does God.
Bull. You are just using insults, invective and self congratulation to bolster and otherwise evidence free set of ideas. You said it yourself that you had a feeling one day while meditating, or sleeping or whatever it was, and have spend the decades since then engaged in a campaign of personal confirmation bias to support your claims about what that feeling was.
You never back up anything you say - instead you just call people ignorant, arrogant or worse whenever they point this fact out.
Bull. You are just using insults, invective and self congratulation to bolster and otherwise evidence free set of ideas.
Look up insult . . . especially the part about it being about a PERSON . . . not ideas, views or opinions.
Quote:
You never back up anything you say - instead you just call people ignorant, arrogant or worse whenever they point this fact out.
Again with the unsupported and unsupportable claims about my views. I await ANY substantive rebuttals in place of your constant baseless opinions. Attacking and baiting me will not get it done.
I cant rebut if you do not evidence your views. You just declare them - offer nothing that is amenable to rebuttal - then act smug that no one has rebutted you.
Again I invite you to read your own nonsense synthesis. Read the opening paragraphs in the light of what I am saying. See how there is no evidence or argument in those paragraphs. Just you describing the people who agree with you in glowing terms - before referring to those who do not as ignorant, under educated, biased and more.
Your whole approach is based on faulting others in order to elevate yourself and your fantasies. If you want me to rebut something then give me something to rebut. The claim that the universe itself is conscious for example. Evidence that rather than just stating it.
Or are you just going to stick to your usual thread of declaring there is some mass personal agenda of people who are just out to get you?
I cant rebut if you do not evidence your views. You just declare them - offer nothing that is amenable to rebuttal - then act smug that no one has rebutted you.
Again I invite you to read your own nonsense synthesis. Read the opening paragraphs in the light of what I am saying. See how there is no evidence or argument in those paragraphs. Just you describing the people who agree with you in glowing terms - before referring to those who do not as ignorant, under educated, biased and more.
Your whole approach is based on faulting others in order to elevate yourself and your fantasies. If you want me to rebut something then give me something to rebut. The claim that the universe itself is conscious for example. Evidence that rather than just stating it.
Or are you just going to stick to your usual thread of declaring there is some mass personal agenda of people who are just out to get you?
Try reading more than the opening paragraphs, monumentus . . . the Synthesis was created in response to conversations and a personal request (demand) from someone who wanted to know more. Judging the whole Synthesis on the basis of that is hardly wise or fair.
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.
