i am curious...... (64)
pikengren: we bought a mexican jumping bean.
my ex and i took it to my father's house,
and started drinking beer.
my father started psing some philisophical questions.
he always has, but they have always been silly questions.
i wonder sometimes the silliness of the questions is a point
in itself. as discussion progressed,
what i learned, which may or may not be true,
is that there is a worm living in the bean,
forever trying to get out of the bean.
so, of course, i broke the bean open,
and there was a little green worm.
he just layed there, his purpse in life
now removed.
of course, i got distracted with things,
like how do they mate, get into the bean to begin with etc.
but, i still always go back to seeing
the little green worm laying there,
his purpose in life completely removed.
as much as i poke fun at conflict for no reason,
is it necessary for our survival?
my ex and i took it to my father's house,
and started drinking beer.
my father started psing some philisophical questions.
he always has, but they have always been silly questions.
i wonder sometimes the silliness of the questions is a point
in itself. as discussion progressed,
what i learned, which may or may not be true,
is that there is a worm living in the bean,
forever trying to get out of the bean.
so, of course, i broke the bean open,
and there was a little green worm.
he just layed there, his purpse in life
now removed.
of course, i got distracted with things,
like how do they mate, get into the bean to begin with etc.
but, i still always go back to seeing
the little green worm laying there,
his purpose in life completely removed.
as much as i poke fun at conflict for no reason,
is it necessary for our survival?
By any chance Pikengren are you familiar with the lyrics of PJ Harvey?
Just wondering, is all...
------ This thread is Archived ------
Dagosto: By any chance Pikengren are you familiar with the lyrics of PJ Harvey?
Just wondering, is all...
Just wondering, is all...
actually, no.
but, i am psitive i acan't be the only
one to have had these thoughts.
as a musician,
i realize that any of us would
be hard pressed to come up with
an actual original thought.
the only thing that can make it appear original
is presentation, and timing.
so, please share sir.
------ This thread is Archived ------
amahlala: I want to see what others say, you've brought up interesting questions.
thank you amahalamanalama hala hala
for letting me know i am not speaking into thin air.
------ This thread is Archived ------
jac379: I'll criticise anything that I see as being damaging.
This morning there was a thread with a young woman asking for advice on a difficult and emotive topic.
Some people had to bring religion into the equation to give her a good telling off for things that were in her past and unchangeable and to put a bloody great guilt trip on her without knowing a tiny fraction of her history, circumstances and culture. It was judgemental, cruel and unproductive. It didn't help her at all with her current dilema.
I have no problem with other people's belief systems, but when they use it to bully and control, I will criticise, as I expect others to challenge me if I'm doing the same.
Does that make me an awful person?
If so, I'm awfully glad to be bad.
This morning there was a thread with a young woman asking for advice on a difficult and emotive topic.
Some people had to bring religion into the equation to give her a good telling off for things that were in her past and unchangeable and to put a bloody great guilt trip on her without knowing a tiny fraction of her history, circumstances and culture. It was judgemental, cruel and unproductive. It didn't help her at all with her current dilema.
I have no problem with other people's belief systems, but when they use it to bully and control, I will criticise, as I expect others to challenge me if I'm doing the same.
Does that make me an awful person?
If so, I'm awfully glad to be bad.
I never said you were a bad person for supporting a person in a bad position. And I would not bully someone to do something they do not want to do. To tell you the truth, I am not extremely religious. But I was pointing out that Atheists point critical fingers at Catholics and Christians when there are extremists on other religions.
As for putting the woman who is in a difficult predicament, of course i feel sorry for her and i think i saw the post you are talking about. If someone throws in their belief which is based on religion, it is perfectly within their right because that is what the religion practices no matter what religion it actually is, that is what the person believes in. Of course every decision should be based on what the person feels is right. What if the person you thought was critical made an argument with the same case that excluded religion? would that person be so bad because there was not the referance to God or Allah?
------ This thread is Archived ------
YankeeJ: I never said you were a bad person for supporting a person in a bad position. And I would not bully someone to do something they do not want to do. To tell you the truth, I am not extremely religious. But I was pointing out that Atheists point critical fingers at Catholics and Christians when there are extremists on other religions.
As for putting the woman who is in a difficult predicament, of course i feel sorry for her and i think i saw the post you are talking about. If someone throws in their belief which is based on religion, it is perfectly within their right because that is what the religion practices no matter what religion it actually is, that is what the person believes in. Of course every decision should be based on what the person feels is right. What if the person you thought was critical made an argument with the same case that excluded religion? would that person be so bad because there was not the referance to God or Allah?
As for putting the woman who is in a difficult predicament, of course i feel sorry for her and i think i saw the post you are talking about. If someone throws in their belief which is based on religion, it is perfectly within their right because that is what the religion practices no matter what religion it actually is, that is what the person believes in. Of course every decision should be based on what the person feels is right. What if the person you thought was critical made an argument with the same case that excluded religion? would that person be so bad because there was not the referance to God or Allah?
i see an attempt to carefull approach a situation and learn a different point of view.
now you can stomp someone,
or share info.
what would be more beneficial to all of us?
------ This thread is Archived ------
by lack of response,
does that mean without conflict,
we cease to have reason for disscusion?
does that mean without conflict,
we cease to have reason for disscusion?
------ This thread is Archived ------
pikengren: i see an attempt to carefull approach a situation and learn a different point of view.
now you can stomp someone,
or share info.
what would be more beneficial to all of us?
now you can stomp someone,
or share info.
what would be more beneficial to all of us?
Sharing info and trying to understand each other is the way to go! If atheists want to criticize people who believe, they should first ask someone why they believe. If a Christian wants to criticize an atheist for not believing, he should first ask why the atheist does not believe. that way there is a clear understanding of each position instead of constant criticism for no apparent reason.
------ This thread is Archived ------
YankeeJ: Sharing info and trying to understand each other is the way to go! If atheists want to criticize people who believe, they should first ask someone why they believe. If a Christian wants to criticize an atheist for not believing, he should first ask why the atheist does not believe. that way there is a clear understanding of each position instead of constant criticism for no apparent reason.
i suppose i am aking people to question
themselves,
and be honest with themselves,
what their motivations are for questioning
others beliefs?
but so many times,
you have to lead up to it,
rather than come out with it.
it seems like you have seen where my
logic has been going.
tread softly now.
------ This thread is Archived ------
pikengren: i suppose i am aking people to question
themselves,
and be honest with themselves,
what their motivations are for questioning
others beliefs?
but so many times,
you have to lead up to it,
rather than come out with it.
it seems like you have seen where my
logic has been going.
tread softly now.
themselves,
and be honest with themselves,
what their motivations are for questioning
others beliefs?
but so many times,
you have to lead up to it,
rather than come out with it.
it seems like you have seen where my
logic has been going.
tread softly now.
Does that mean i passed the test? hahaha! :-P
------ This thread is Archived ------
Blues63: PS. The Jesuits may have coined the term, but the Spartans applied it and created one of the strangest cultures in western history.
It was certainly an interesting one. More from 7 onwards than up to 7 though. ------ This thread is Archived ------
Your questions are interesting P!
Sometimes reading all of this and the responses reminds of the poem Ulysses by Lord Tennyson. I don't understand why it does but the questions you ask seems to resemble the words in the poem...
Sometimes reading all of this and the responses reminds of the poem Ulysses by Lord Tennyson. I don't understand why it does but the questions you ask seems to resemble the words in the poem...
------ This thread is Archived ------
pikengren: there are so many things wrong in the world that
we have grown to accept.
ridiculous bank fees, hunger, people not treating each
other with common courteousy,
the list could go on and on, a wide range
of things of varying importance.
we accept so many things,
yet,
atheists cannot accept people believing in a god of some kind,
and those that believe in a god of some kind
cannot accept that some don't believe.
not all atheists, or all religious people are like this.
but certian people, on both sides,
you can just tell it eats at them.
why?
Who said atheists cannot accept...if they did they are not atheists,,their scammers seeking contact !!we have grown to accept.
ridiculous bank fees, hunger, people not treating each
other with common courteousy,
the list could go on and on, a wide range
of things of varying importance.
we accept so many things,
yet,
atheists cannot accept people believing in a god of some kind,
and those that believe in a god of some kind
cannot accept that some don't believe.
not all atheists, or all religious people are like this.
but certian people, on both sides,
you can just tell it eats at them.
why?
------ This thread is Archived ------
YankeeJ: I never said you were a bad person for supporting a person in a bad position. And I would not bully someone to do something they do not want to do. To tell you the truth, I am not extremely religious. But I was pointing out that Atheists point critical fingers at Catholics and Christians when there are extremists on other religions.
As for putting the woman who is in a difficult predicament, of course i feel sorry for her and i think i saw the post you are talking about. If someone throws in their belief which is based on religion, it is perfectly within their right because that is what the religion practices no matter what religion it actually is, that is what the person believes in. Of course every decision should be based on what the person feels is right. What if the person you thought was critical made an argument with the same case that excluded religion? would that person be so bad because there was not the referance to God or Allah?
As for putting the woman who is in a difficult predicament, of course i feel sorry for her and i think i saw the post you are talking about. If someone throws in their belief which is based on religion, it is perfectly within their right because that is what the religion practices no matter what religion it actually is, that is what the person believes in. Of course every decision should be based on what the person feels is right. What if the person you thought was critical made an argument with the same case that excluded religion? would that person be so bad because there was not the referance to God or Allah?
Yes, whatever moral stance someone takes to put down another vulnerable person is wrong, in my opinion.
Its about using your luxurious power position to make someone else feel bad.
I guess when religion is used it bugs me in the paticular, simply because the bullying tool is presented as something real, when belief systems are unprovable constructs.
If I started beating up on a person about their past decisions, or mistakes because Trixabelle Fallooble the Tooth Fairy said it was wrong and that, as a consequence, that person was bad, would you accept that?
Now if several million people believed in the writings and judgements made on Trixie's behalf, would that make it ok?
If someone has a current dilema and they are a fellow follower of Trixabell Fallooble, then fine - solve the problem within your own value framework.
The thing is, this is an international forum with rather a lot of people and rather a lot of belief systems. If a person has a dilema, its only open to religious judgement if they request. Otherwise, practical, universal solutions should be the stance of the debate, without judgement.
------ This thread is Archived ------
pikengren: by lack of response,
does that mean without conflict,
we cease to have reason for disscusion?
does that mean without conflict,
we cease to have reason for disscusion?
Yup, conflict is important.
Look at any story - stories always evolve out of conflict:
"The beautiful princess is going to marry a handsome prince when she grows up, but the Wicked Witch of the West puts a spell on her so that she turns into a wombat."
The story is that the princess will marry princey in the future. The witch turning her into a wombat conflicts with this scenario. A solution must be found. Usually, each attempt at a solution involves conflict and so the story twists and turns until we get back to the original marriage idea on a different level of understanding.
Its the same with debate - you need that conflict to create the twists and turns, to evolve the understanding.
I think perhaps the issue is, how we create that conflict, which ways are productive, which ways get us nowhere and which ways have a negative outcome.
Even for the greatest people in this field, it must be a constant learning process because if conflict is not at times original, no original thought will come from it.
Its hardly surprising that a mixed bunch of monkeys on a dating website get it wrong some of the time/quite a lot of the time.
I like these kind of threads, P. To learn the tools of learning can only be a good thing, whether that's learning from others, or what you learn thinking aloud and processing it all in a comment.
I've sometimes been criticised for "challenging" statements that I see as judgemental, negative, incorrect, whatever. I fail to see how any of us can move on and learn without being challenged. I love it when someone challenges me well and a penny drops, but I think as has been said before, one needs to be secure enough to acknowledge that one may not always be right.
I think its important to have some internal conflict as well and challenge your own beliefs. I've quoted this a couple of times already but Mohammed Ali once said something like, "A man who has the same opinions at the age of 50 as he had at 20, has had a wasted life".
------ This thread is Archived ------
jac379: Yup, conflict is important.
Look at any story - stories always evolve out of conflict:
"The beautiful princess is going to marry a handsome prince when she grows up, but the Wicked Witch of the West puts a spell on her so that she turns into a wombat."
The story is that the princess will marry princey in the future. The witch turning her into a wombat conflicts with this scenario. A solution must be found. Usually, each attempt at a solution involves conflict and so the story twists and turns until we get back to the original marriage idea on a different level of understanding.
Its the same with debate - you need that conflict to create the twists and turns, to evolve the understanding.
I think perhaps the issue is, how we create that conflict, which ways are productive, which ways get us nowhere and which ways have a negative outcome.
Even for the greatest people in this field, it must be a constant learning process because if conflict is not at times original, no original thought will come from it.
Its hardly surprising that a mixed bunch of monkeys on a dating website get it wrong some of the time/quite a lot of the time.
I like these kind of threads, P. To learn the tools of learning can only be a good thing, whether that's learning from others, or what you learn thinking aloud and processing it all in a comment.
I've sometimes been criticised for "challenging" statements that I see as judgemental, negative, incorrect, whatever. I fail to see how any of us can move on and learn without being challenged. I love it when someone challenges me well and a penny drops, but I think as has been said before, one needs to be secure enough to acknowledge that one may not always be right.
I think its important to have some internal conflict as well and challenge your own beliefs. I've quoted this a couple of times already but Mohammed Ali once said something like, "A man who has the same opinions at the age of 50 as he had at 20, has had a wasted life".
Look at any story - stories always evolve out of conflict:
"The beautiful princess is going to marry a handsome prince when she grows up, but the Wicked Witch of the West puts a spell on her so that she turns into a wombat."
The story is that the princess will marry princey in the future. The witch turning her into a wombat conflicts with this scenario. A solution must be found. Usually, each attempt at a solution involves conflict and so the story twists and turns until we get back to the original marriage idea on a different level of understanding.
Its the same with debate - you need that conflict to create the twists and turns, to evolve the understanding.
I think perhaps the issue is, how we create that conflict, which ways are productive, which ways get us nowhere and which ways have a negative outcome.
Even for the greatest people in this field, it must be a constant learning process because if conflict is not at times original, no original thought will come from it.
Its hardly surprising that a mixed bunch of monkeys on a dating website get it wrong some of the time/quite a lot of the time.
I like these kind of threads, P. To learn the tools of learning can only be a good thing, whether that's learning from others, or what you learn thinking aloud and processing it all in a comment.
I've sometimes been criticised for "challenging" statements that I see as judgemental, negative, incorrect, whatever. I fail to see how any of us can move on and learn without being challenged. I love it when someone challenges me well and a penny drops, but I think as has been said before, one needs to be secure enough to acknowledge that one may not always be right.
I think its important to have some internal conflict as well and challenge your own beliefs. I've quoted this a couple of times already but Mohammed Ali once said something like, "A man who has the same opinions at the age of 50 as he had at 20, has had a wasted life".
------ This thread is Archived ------
jac379: Yup, conflict is important.
Look at any story - stories always evolve out of conflict:
"The beautiful princess is going to marry a handsome prince when she grows up, but the Wicked Witch of the West puts a spell on her so that she turns into a wombat."
The story is that the princess will marry princey in the future. The witch turning her into a wombat conflicts with this scenario. A solution must be found. Usually, each attempt at a solution involves conflict and so the story twists and turns until we get back to the original marriage idea on a different level of understanding.
Its the same with debate - you need that conflict to create the twists and turns, to evolve the understanding.
I think perhaps the issue is, how we create that conflict, which ways are productive, which ways get us nowhere and which ways have a negative outcome.
Even for the greatest people in this field, it must be a constant learning process because if conflict is not at times original, no original thought will come from it.
Its hardly surprising that a mixed bunch of monkeys on a dating website get it wrong some of the time/quite a lot of the time.
I like these kind of threads, P. To learn the tools of learning can only be a good thing, whether that's learning from others, or what you learn thinking aloud and processing it all in a comment.
I've sometimes been criticised for "challenging" statements that I see as judgemental, negative, incorrect, whatever. I fail to see how any of us can move on and learn without being challenged. I love it when someone challenges me well and a penny drops, but I think as has been said before, one needs to be secure enough to acknowledge that one may not always be right.
I think its important to have some internal conflict as well and challenge your own beliefs. I've quoted this a couple of times already but Mohammed Ali once said something like, "A man who has the same opinions at the age of 50 as he had at 20, has had a wasted life".
Look at any story - stories always evolve out of conflict:
"The beautiful princess is going to marry a handsome prince when she grows up, but the Wicked Witch of the West puts a spell on her so that she turns into a wombat."
The story is that the princess will marry princey in the future. The witch turning her into a wombat conflicts with this scenario. A solution must be found. Usually, each attempt at a solution involves conflict and so the story twists and turns until we get back to the original marriage idea on a different level of understanding.
Its the same with debate - you need that conflict to create the twists and turns, to evolve the understanding.
I think perhaps the issue is, how we create that conflict, which ways are productive, which ways get us nowhere and which ways have a negative outcome.
Even for the greatest people in this field, it must be a constant learning process because if conflict is not at times original, no original thought will come from it.
Its hardly surprising that a mixed bunch of monkeys on a dating website get it wrong some of the time/quite a lot of the time.
I like these kind of threads, P. To learn the tools of learning can only be a good thing, whether that's learning from others, or what you learn thinking aloud and processing it all in a comment.
I've sometimes been criticised for "challenging" statements that I see as judgemental, negative, incorrect, whatever. I fail to see how any of us can move on and learn without being challenged. I love it when someone challenges me well and a penny drops, but I think as has been said before, one needs to be secure enough to acknowledge that one may not always be right.
I think its important to have some internal conflict as well and challenge your own beliefs. I've quoted this a couple of times already but Mohammed Ali once said something like, "A man who has the same opinions at the age of 50 as he had at 20, has had a wasted life".
sometimes we learn more from watching conflict,
rather than being a part of it.
your last couple posts make some really good points.
thank you!
------ This thread is Archived ------
i know i ramble,
thanks to all that had the patience to
find my point and comment on it.
thanks to all that had the patience to
find my point and comment on it.
------ This thread is Archived ------
"and those that believe in a god of some kind
cannot accept that some don't believe.
not all atheists, or all religious people are like this.
but certian people, on both sides,
you can just tell it eats at them."
why?
Because many of them are brought up to be prejudice ....or it works for them to make money.......
cannot accept that some don't believe.
not all atheists, or all religious people are like this.
but certian people, on both sides,
you can just tell it eats at them."
why?
Because many of them are brought up to be prejudice ....or it works for them to make money.......
------ This thread is Archived ------
jvaski: "and those that believe in a god of some kind
cannot accept that some don't believe.
not all atheists, or all religious people are like this.
but certian people, on both sides,
you can just tell it eats at them."
why?
Because many of them are brought up to be prejudice ....or it works for them to make money.......
cannot accept that some don't believe.
not all atheists, or all religious people are like this.
but certian people, on both sides,
you can just tell it eats at them."
why?
Because many of them are brought up to be prejudice ....or it works for them to make money.......
makes them feel holier than thou,
smarter than thou,
or sell their book?
so ego or cash?
------ This thread is Archived ------
This Thread is Archived
This Thread is archived, so you will no longer be able to post to it. Threads get archived automatically when they are older than 3 months.
« Go back to All Threads
« Go back to All Threads
More Threads
everything is changing
What's going on
Salami, Salami, Baloney
Reality Check
How far is too far?
Nature
What I Lack In Vocabulary
Don Shits-In-Pants!!!
rarotonga
1830's Music
More Threads
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
we bought a mexican jumping bean.
my ex and i took it to my father's house,
and started drinking beer.
my father started psing some philisophical questions.
he always has, but they have always been silly questions.
i wonder sometimes the silliness of the questions is a point
in itself.
as discussion progressed,
what i learned, which may or may not be true,
is that there is a worm living in the bean,
forever trying to get out of the bean.
so, of course, i broke the bean open,
and there was a little green worm.
he just layed there, his purpse in life
now removed.
of course, i got distracted with things,
like how do they mate, get into the bean to begin with etc.
but, i still always go back to seeing
the little green worm laying there,
his purpose in life completely removed.
as much as i poke fun at conflict for no reason,
is it necessary for our survival?