Religious and Political mindsets, and Cultism - A somewhat general discussion

Post by **LarsMac** » Tue May 23, 2017 8:41 am

This conversation started in another thread, but this seems to be getting a little broader than the scope of the original thread, so I thought maybe we could make this a more generalized thread.

Ahso!;1509442 wrote:

[QUOTE=LarsMac;1509439]Well, I certainly don't take credit for that.
Even though you posted it? Oh, the irony! I didn't think you would own up to it, you hardly ever do and I expect why you insist on being as vague as you often are.

I forget that you are a literalist. Sorry. So, OK, I did say that. I merely meant to say that the idea was not mine to own. It was an observation, based on what others far more studied than myself have stated and published.

What you seem to perceive as "vagueness" is just kind of the way I was trying to start a conversation.

Ahso!;1509442 wrote:

[QUOTE=LarsMac;1509439]I merely took off with what you had written earlier.
Either you're admitting to trolling or not taking responsibility by saying that your error is my fault? I doubt you even understood what I had posted before that.

I didn't think that it was an error, and was not offering to lay blame on anyone.

Ahso!;1509442 wrote:

[QUOTE=LarsMac;1509439]Of course the whole thing circles back to that collective memory and knowledge where a group of individuals seem to share a particular collection of ideas and memories.That's called cult-thinking, and what I've been pointing out throughout these threads. Go on...

Yes, my point. The process itself is common Human behavior. We all have our collective mindset, but many of us will fall victim to the darker aspects of a particular view. Sometimes the differences are in who defines the cults.

Ahso!;1509442 wrote:

[QUOTE=LarsMac;1509439]And people tend to pool their opinions and beliefs into some sort of joint experience.My point exactly

AH! Then we are actually in agreement.

Ahso!;1509442 wrote:

[QUOTE=LarsMac;1509439]From that experience they can then determine what is reality.So you're a member as well.

A member of what, exactly?

Ahso!;1509442 wrote:

[QUOTE=LarsMac;1509439]But is their reality valid for others who have been a part of a different collective experience?
Reality isn't negotiable. The world isn't flat, and because any group of people want to insist it is does not change that fact.

True enough. But, unlike some folks around here, I don't claim to know all the details. I am just another observer.

Ahso!;1509442 wrote:

[QUOTE=LarsMac;1509439]You can reject the experience of other people and stick to that reality which you have chosen, but that does not necessarily invalidate the others' perception of reality.
Insisting on cult-like groupthink as reality? Really?

Well, it seems to depend upon which group you claim membership in.

More (not so) random thoughts. (Pre-Coffee musings)

I was merely gathering comments from various conversations about how the human mind works.

You have arrived at your world view from gathering knowledge from other people, and from your own experiences, and drawn your unique view of the universe. Is that not so?

You accept the ideas some people have expressed, and reject others, based upon the world view you have compiled.

That seems to be the way the mind works. Most of us are capable of revising our world/universe view as new data arrives and is compiled and qualified.

A lot of people like to discuss their views and to receive information from others'to compare notes, and test their views with peers to see how those views stand up to the perspectives of those around them.

Many (read most) people, though, will decide that their view is fine just the way it is, and will reject any further input that does not coincide with their particular view of the universe.

Others seem to believe that their view is the only view, and that in expressing them they are sharing the true idea which others will immediately recongnize as the "Truth." Those folks can get rather testy when their ideas are not only not accepted, but even criticized and rejected. These people will often fall back to defend their view by attacking the views of others who disagree.

I know many people who are quite brilliant and very logical in their thinking.

However my kinship with them is often tested when I hear them espouse ideas that seem to me terribly ill-informed and illogical. I wonder "How did they hell they come up with THAT?!?!?"

I am sure that they sometimes think the same thing about me.

Two people can be presented with exactly the same collection of information from the exact same source, and derive nearly polar opposite conclusions.

I am sure that you have seen that on occasion. Yes?

To what do you attribute that phenomenon?

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Tue May 23, 2017 9:18 am

Your entire argument rests squarely on an equivocation of reality. Reality is not a state of mind, it is a state of factual occurrence. To say that anyone can live in a lala land in their head and call that reality is so far afoul of the word reality it's staggering. What a person in any state of mind outside of reality is is delusional to a degree depending on the severity of the delusion and absence of what is, in fact, real.

Is that too literal for you?

Equivocation is perhaps the most often fallacy religious or spiritual people fall into.

ETA: Also, the only reason I can think of for "political" to be a part of the title of this discussion is to try to justify the fallacy further, because it does not belong in this thread.

Post by **LarsMac** » Tue May 23, 2017 10:06 am

Ahso!;1509459 wrote: Your entire argument rests squarely on an equivocation of reality. Reality is not a state of mind, it is a state of factual occurrence. To say that anyone can live in a lala land in their head and call that reality is so far afoul of the word reality it's staggering. What a person in any state of mind outside of reality is is delusional to a degree depending on the severity of the delusion and absence of what is, in fact, real.

Is that too literal for you?

Equivocation is perhaps the most often fallacy religious or spiritual people fall into.

ETA: Also, the only reason I can think of for "political" to be a part of the title of this discussion is to try to justify the fallacy further, because it does not belong in this thread.

There is your "literalist" viewpoint, again. Reality is a given. true.

The thing is, the human mental state is not necessarily set in reality. Certainly, the physical existence in which we find ourselves is the reality. We cannot step off a 14 story building and expect any outcome other than a rather messy end to our existence as a living organism. And we all benefit from the laws of physics. Those are established fact.

But Humans find ways of transcending the physical reality that we perceive. For example, there are people who can step off that 14-story building, and find all sorts of handholds, and footholds, that will allow them to find their way to the ground below in a perfectly intact and healthy state of being. For them reality holds a completely different meaning than we can comprehend. Their perception of reality is far more granular than ours.

I am talking about the perception of that reality. And for some, perception IS the reality.

And Politics, for some is no more rooted in that reality than religion.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Tue May 23, 2017 11:29 am

No matter how many ways you try to rephrase it or examples you conjure up it's still an equivocation and typical of a cult mindset.

Post by **LarsMac** » Tue May 23, 2017 11:47 am

Ahso!;1509462 wrote: No matter how many ways you try to rephrase it or examples you conjure up it's still an equivocation and typical of a cult mindset.

You're proving my point.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Tue May 23, 2017 11:50 am

LarsMac;1509453 wrote: Two people can be presented with exactly the same collection of information from the exact same source, and derive nearly polar opposite conclusions.

I am sure that you have seen that on occasion.

I think this happened between me and Byrn.

The Red Tent

Posts #15, #21, #25,

For all practical purpose, we were both discussing the same facts. I had other things to say but saw no reason to press the subject.

Let it be.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Tue May 23, 2017 12:03 pm

LarsMac;1509463 wrote: You're proving my point.Not really! Equvocation has no point other than to try to justify itself. You're insisting delusion, which you appear to have defined as perspective, is reality. It appears you've now added caution to the list (your example above). This conversation has no place to go when words have any meaning applied to them at all.

Have you met Kelly Ann Conway?

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Tue May 23, 2017 12:05 pm

tude dog;1509465 wrote: I think this happened between me and Byrn.

The Red Tent

Posts #15, #21, #25,

For all practical purpose, we were both discussing the same facts. I had other things to say but saw no reason to press the subject.

Let it be.This should certify it for you. If it doesn't, you're really buried deep.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Tue May 23, 2017 1:07 pm

Ahso!;1509467 wrote: This should certify it for you. If it doesn't, you're really buried deep.

We never did agree on the same information presented.

Mickiel · Post by **Mickiel** » Tue May 23, 2017 1:24 pm

I am not a part of any group, I walk alone in my views. I kind of grew tired of the group thinking, and I wanted to think for myself. Because I found myself disagreeing with the collective so much. So I left the hive and I fly alone.

And I have found peace in my solitude.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Tue May 23, 2017 1:36 pm

Mickiel;1509469 wrote: I am not a part of any group, I walk alone in my views. I kind of grew tired of the group thinking, and I wanted to think for myself. Because I found myself disagreeing with the collective so much. So I left the hive and I fly alone.

And I have found peace in my solitude.You might think so, however, the core elements of the cult beliefs are still there. You've just become a prodigal son. For as long as you adhere to the delusions of the cult you are a part of the cult. Everything you post proves what I've said. You think because you add and subtract at your own will you're out. You're mistaken. The only solace you can take in that is that you're not in contact with anyone in the cult to tell you to get back in line with the strict doctrine. I know that feels like freedom, but it only shows just how deeply ingrained the delusions are and how captive you are to the lies of the cult.

Mickiel · Post by **Mickiel** » Tue May 23, 2017 1:44 pm

Ahso!;1509470 wrote: You might think so, however, the core elements of the cult beliefs are still there. You've just become a prodigal son. For as long as you adhere to the delusions of the cult you are a part of the cult. Everything you post proves what I've said. You think because you add and subtract at your own will you're out. You're mistaken. The only solace you can take in that is that you're not in contact with anyone in the cult to tell you to get back in line with the strict doctrine. I know that feels like freedom, but it only shows just how deeply ingrained the delusions are and how captive you are to the lies of the cult.

I am free of the group and even free of the critics of the group, like yourself. You cannot define me ; I know you desire to, but I am free of you. There is nothing you can do to me or my views. Because nothing about me, is based on you.

My mindset is not religious, its not Theist or Atheist; I am free of all that jive.

I walk another path.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Tue May 23, 2017 1:59 pm

Mickiel;1509471 wrote: I am free of the group and even free of the critics of the group, like yourself. You cannot define me ; I know you desire to, but I am free of you. There is nothing you can do to me or my views. Because nothing about me, is based on you.

My mindset is not religious, its not Theist or Atheist; I am free of all that jive.

I walk another path.Keep telling yourself that, it's the very defense the cult taught you. Read what you've typed, it's the very same thing members of any cult inside or outside the group proclaims. The internet is loaded with lots of other people just like you. You want to believe otherwise and you've been taught how to deflect any outside influence. Look at how good you are at turning yourself off to anyone or anything contrary to what you want to believe, in spite of factual reality. You've become so brainwashed you don't recognize reality any longer.

Post by **LarsMac** » Tue May 23, 2017 2:07 pm

Ahso!;1509466 wrote: Not really! Equvocation [sic] has no point other than to try to justify itself. You're insisting delusion, which you appear to have defined as perspective, is reality. It appears you've now added caution to the list (your example above). This conversation has no place to go when words have any meaning applied to them at all.

That is all very nice, but I have nothing to justify. As stated, I merely made some observations about how people tend to let their personal feelings, and preconceptions get in the way of their grasp of reality.

Ahso!;1509466 wrote: Have you met Kelly Ann Conway?

That was pretty low. Even for you.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Tue May 23, 2017 2:15 pm

LarsMac;1509474 wrote: That is all very nice, but I have nothing to justify.Not that you can identify anyway.

LarsMac;1509474 wrote: That was pretty low. Even for you.You'll get over it.

Post by **LarsMac** » Tue May 23, 2017 2:21 pm

Ahso!;1509472 wrote: Keep telling yourself that, it's the very defense the cult taught you. Read what you've typed, it's the very same thing members of any cult inside or outside the group proclaims. The internet is loaded with lots of other people just like you. You want to believe otherwise and you've been taught how to deflect any outside influence. Look at how good you are at turning yourself off to anyone or anything contrary to what you want to believe, in spite of factual reality. You've become so brainwashed you don't recognize reality any longer.

On the contrary, as much as I disagree with his philosophies, I think that Mikiel is probably as free a thinker as any who regularly haunt this site.

There are others here about whom I would certainly agree with you on their cultish beliefs, but Mikiel seems to be off on a long strange trip in a cult all his own.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Tue May 23, 2017 3:40 pm

You just don't get it, do you.

Cult person says: "There is a God". Then cult member goes about to make reality fit his/her statement rather than seeking to find out if the statement has any basis in reality. Example: Cult member now acknowledges Evolution, even though he/she has absolutely no understanding of what that is, but still believes he/she does. So what does he/she do? Combines the Genesis story of the creation of Adam, which Genesis is quite clear in proclaiming that Adam was the beginning of the human along with the creation of the earth and the universe, for that matter. Cult member though, in order to justify his/her cult-taught belief in God, says "okay, so then Adam was the first "man", but not the first member of the human species." It's laughable!

This is completely contrary to Natural Selection in so many ways and the bible story, but you want to enable this by calling it free-thinking. It's delusional, that's what it is, FFS! If cult members want to write a fictional story, I have no problem with that. Hell, I'll even contribute. However, acknowledge that that's what it is - fiction. That isn't what's going on though. What happening is a continuation of the denial of reality to propagate a delusional upbringing, thus continuing to brainwash themselves and dragging down with them anyone else impressionable who also might be reading.

What you're correct about is that there are a number of them posting at FG, but the number is at least one more than you realize. I say that because there is no other reason for anyone to actively enable this sort of thinking unless they are one of them.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Tue May 23, 2017 5:24 pm

[QUOTE=Ahso!;1509477]You just don't get it, do you.

Cult person says: "There is a God"[/url]

Another cult person says there is no God.

Since there is no way to prove the existence of a God and atheist would not believe in a God.

Mickiel · Post by **Mickiel** » Wed May 24, 2017 3:07 am

Ahso!;1509472 wrote: Keep telling yourself that, it's the very defense the cult taught you. Read what you've typed, it's the very same thing members of any cult inside or outside the group proclaims. The internet is loaded with lots of other people just like you. You want to believe otherwise and you've been taught how to deflect any outside influence. Look at how good you are at turning yourself off to anyone or anything contrary to what you want to believe, in spite of factual reality. You've become so brainwashed you don't recognize reality any longer.

My brain has been washed, and I won't allow any more dirt to settle inside of it;

never again.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Wed May 24, 2017 3:12 am

You don't have to be religious to be a member of a cult.

Oxford engliah dictionary

noun

1A system of religious veneration and devotion directed towards a particular figure or object.

â€˜the cult of St Olafâ€™

1.1 A relatively small group of people having religious beliefs or practices regarded by others as strange or as imposing excessive control over members.

â€˜a network of Satan-worshipping cultsâ€™

1.2 A misplaced or excessive admiration for a particular thing.

â€˜the cult of the pursuit of money as an end in itselfâ€™

2A person or thing that is popular or fashionable among a particular group or section of society.

â€˜the series has become a bit of a cult in the UKâ€™

as modifier â€˜a cult filmâ€™

Stalin, in his form of communism, deliberately set out to create a state religion using the same technoques he had learned while training to be a priest he jusy adapted.

Mickiel is not a freethinker when it comes to his belief in god. I suspect it would help him if he could get away from said belief in god but that's my own attitudes colouring my opinion.

You should have a look for these guys on you tube.

The Atheist Experience TV Show

Some of the debates are fascinating and a bit beyond the usual ill informed ad hominem nonsense you get. Don't tell mne anything I had not worked out for myself during my teenage years but learning how to articulate it and put across your point debate helps the development process. A lot of religious people are incapable of thinking beyond what they have been taught ( so are many others come to that especially when it comes to politics)

Post by **LarsMac** » Wed May 24, 2017 6:19 am

Groupthink invades every aspect of society. Humans are actually tuned to groupthink. we are pack animals. Very few of us are truly loners. For centuries, perhaps even millennia, we have had family and community to be our tribe or pack. We now exist in a world where many of us may chose whatever tribe we will belong to.

Many turn to various organizations and nations and even sports teams for tribes to belong to.

Belonging transcends reason.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Wed May 24, 2017 1:12 pm

LarsMac;1509493 wrote: Groupthink invades every aspect of society. Humans are actually tuned to groupthink. we are pack animals. Very few of us are truly loners. For centuries, perhaps even millennia, we have had family and community to be our tribe or pack. We now exist in a world where many of us may chose whatever tribe we will belong to.

Many turn to various organizations and nations and even sports teams for tribes to belong to.

Belonging transcends reason.Do you mind citing some sources for your beliefs?

Post by **LarsMac** » Wed May 24, 2017 3:21 pm

Ahso!;1509517 wrote: Do you mind citing some sources for your beliefs?

Those are observations, not beliefs.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Wed May 24, 2017 5:57 pm

LarsMac;1509529 wrote: Those are observations, not beliefs.Impossible and therefore completely untrue if you're claiming them yourself. So do you mind citing the papers where the observations are documented?

OTOH, it could be more equivocation.

Post by **LarsMac** » Thu May 25, 2017 7:02 am

Ahso!;1509541 wrote: Impossible and therefore completely untrue if you're claiming them yourself. So do you mind citing the papers where the observations are documented?

OTOH, it could be more equivocation.

What, pray tell, is impossible?

But to your request, here are some interesting reads on the concept:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/15/opini ... think.html

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/328/5981/987

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/3 ... 2b27ffcf0a

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... 12029/full

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... 296.x/full

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Thu May 25, 2017 7:20 am

I thought my post was very clear. What is impossible is for any individual to make the statement that

"Groupthink invades every aspect of society. Humans are actually tuned to groupthink. we are pack animals. Very few of us are truly loners. For centuries, perhaps even millennia, we have had family and community to be our tribe or pack. We now exist in a world where many of us may chose whatever tribe we will belong to.

Many turn to various organizations and nations and even sports teams for tribes to belong to.

Belonging transcends reason."

based on personal observation unless said person has dedicated years of very specific research on the various subjects mentioned. Even then without the proper credentials the findings would be suspect.

All I'm asking for is to see the research. Alternatively, you could have pulled this out of the old poop-shoot as one intuitively inclined. In any case, either provide the research to back up your many claims contained in your statement or tell us you're guessing. Either will suffice.

Post by **LarsMac** » Thu May 25, 2017 7:29 am

Ahso!;1509562 wrote: I thought my post was very clear. What is impossible is for any individual to make the statement that

"Groupthink invades every aspect of society. Humans are actually tuned to groupthink. we are pack animals. Very few of us are truly loners. For centuries, perhaps even millennia, we have had family and community to be our tribe or pack. We now exist in a world where many of us may chose whatever tribe we will belong to.

Many turn to various organizations and nations and even sports teams for tribes to belong to.

Belonging transcends reason."

based on personal observation unless said person has dedicated years of very specific research on the various subjects mentioned. Even then without the proper credentials the findings would be suspect.

All I'm asking for is to see the research. Alternatively, you could have pulled this out of the old poop-shoot as one intuitively inclined. In any case, either provide the research to back up your many claims contained in your statement or tell us you're guessing. Either will suffice.

Well, I've spent sixty years or so personally observing the humans within my universe. Having done so, I think I am entitled to arrive at some conclusions based upon those observations.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Thu May 25, 2017 7:38 am

LarsMac;1509563 wrote: Well, I've spent sixty years or so personally observing the humans within my universe. Having done so, I think I am entitled to arrive at some conclusions based upon those observations.That would be door number two or the subjective intuition answer, which means you're projecting your very limited and untrained personal observations onto all of the human existence.

That's all I was asking for. Thank you!

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Thu May 25, 2017 7:40 am

LarsMac;1509561 wrote: What, pray tell, is impossible?

But to your request, here are some interesting reads on the concept:

The Rise of the New Groupthink - The New York Times

Stochastic Emergence of Groupthink | Science

Social Influence Bias: A Randomized Experiment | Science

Enterprise Social Media: Definition, History, and Prospects for the Study of Social Technologies in Organizations - Leonardi - 2013 - Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication - Wiley Online Library

Reinforcing Spirals: The Mutual Influence of Media Selectivity and Media Effects and Their Impact on Individual Behavior and Social Identity - Slater - 2007 - Communication Theory - Wiley Online LibraryI'll take a look. I would like the record to show, however, that you added the links after I responded to the original post.

Post by **LarsMac** » Thu May 25, 2017 7:44 am

Ahso!;1509565 wrote: That would be door number two or the subjective intuition answer, which means you're projecting your very limited and untrained personal observations onto all of the human existence.

That's all I was asking for. Thank you!

I actually have some educational certification on such subjects as well, but I don't feel that those are really relevant to this particular interaction.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Thu May 25, 2017 7:55 am

LarsMac;1509561 wrote: What, pray tell, is impossible?

But to your request, here are some interesting reads on the concept:

The Rise of the New Groupthink - The New York Times

Stochastic Emergence of Groupthink | Science

Social Influence Bias: A Randomized Experiment | Science

Enterprise Social Media: Definition, History, and Prospects for the Study of Social Technologies in Organizations - Leonardi - 2013 - Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication - Wiley Online Library

Reinforcing Spirals: The Mutual Influence of Media Selectivity and Media Effects and Their Impact on Individual Behavior and Social Identity - Slater - 2007 - Communication Theory - Wiley Online LibraryHave you actually read these links? Not one of them, that I can determine, supports your claim that:

"Groupthink invades every aspect of society. Humans are actually tuned to groupthink. we are pack animals. Very few of us are truly loners. For centuries, perhaps even millennia, we have had family and community to be our tribe or pack. We now exist in a world where many of us may chose whatever tribe we will belong to.

Many turn to various organizations and nations and even sports teams for tribes to belong to.

Belonging transcends reason."

Post by **LarsMac** » Thu May 25, 2017 8:07 am

Ahso!;1509569 wrote: Have you actually read these links? Not one of them, that I can determine, supports your claim that:

"Groupthink invades every aspect of society. Humans are actually tuned to groupthink. we are pack animals. Very few of us are truly loners. For centuries, perhaps even millennia, we have had family and community to be our tribe or pack. We now exist in a world where many of us may chose whatever tribe we will belong to.

Many turn to various organizations and nations and even sports teams for tribes to belong to.

Belonging transcends reason."

As I originally said, that statement is my personal observation. Those articles discuss variations om the theme.

Are you ever planning to discuss the OP, or simply expend energy detracting from it.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Thu May 25, 2017 8:27 am

LarsMac;1509571 wrote: As I originally said, that statement is my personal observation. Those articles discuss variations om the theme.

Are you ever planning to discuss the OP, or simply expend energy detracting from it.You made the convoluted statement - presumably in an attempt to show support for whatever it is you've been trying to say from the get-go. Your original query had been sufficiently debunked very early on in case you've missed it. I'm trying to make sense of it all. You appear to just throw statements out there without any supporting evidence other than to say it's what you think. I normally wouldn't mind that and probably wouldn't bother responding to your sophistry except you decided to make an issue out of my interactions with Mickiel and his nonsense.

Post by **LarsMac** » Thu May 25, 2017 8:41 am

Ahso!;1509573 wrote: You made the convoluted statement - presumably in an attempt to show support for whatever it is you've been trying to say from the get-go. Your original query had been sufficiently debunked very early on in case you've missed it. I'm trying to make sense of it all. You appear to just throw statements out there without any supporting evidence other than to say it's what you think. I normally wouldn't mind that and probably wouldn't bother responding to your sophistry except you decided to make an issue out of my interactions with Mickiel and his nonsense.

I made statements that expressed my opinions. It was really that simple.

This is a discussion forum, where people make statements, express opinions, and have interesting discussions.

So far, all you seem to want to do is attack the character of people who dare to offer their opinions.

I am finding you quite boring.

Congratulations. I don't think I have ever actually said that to anyone before.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Thu May 25, 2017 8:54 am

LarsMac;1509575 wrote: I made statements that expressed my opinions. It was really that simple.

This is a discussion forum, where people make statements, express opinions, and have interesting discussions.

So far, all you seem to want to do is attack the character of people who dare to offer their opinions.

I am finding you quite boring.

Congratulations. I don't think I have ever actually said that to anyone before.I understand. Opinions can be based on two criteria mostly, those being either objective facts or subjective experiences. You appear to tend to prefer the latter (except when you want to engage someone like Pahu, I guess, then you're all about factual data, irrespective of the fact that you rarely if ever provide any proof of anything with anyone yourself).

You initiated a thread, got thumped early and refuse to acknowledge that reality. That's not surprising. Your consistent habit of dodging and vague responses and denial are noted.

Post by **LarsMac** » Thu May 25, 2017 9:16 am

I can't say that I get what you're going on about. The OP, and the subject of this thread is really about the subjectivity of opinions and philosophy.

You seem to have taken something personal here, and want to make this about me, rather than perhaps thinking about what I posted, objectively.

If you want to talk about me, then start your own thread.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Thu May 25, 2017 9:20 am

You made yourself the central theme of the thread by arguing that everything you have to say is your personal opinion. Then you deny it and become upset when you get bit in the ass by your own style of arguing. That's special!

Post by **LarsMac** » Thu May 25, 2017 9:23 am

Ahso!;1509580 wrote: You made yourself the central theme of the thread by arguing that everything you have to say is your personal opinion. Then you deny it and become upset when you get bit in the ass by your own style of arguing. That's special!

Whatever you say, Boss.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Thu May 25, 2017 9:31 am

The irony of this entire exchange is that it is factually correct and also now a part of your subjective experience. The only question is what your personal opinion will be from here on out. But I imagine that's always in a state of flux.

Post by **LarsMac** » Thu May 25, 2017 10:19 am

Ahso!;1509583 wrote: The irony of this entire exchange is that it is factually correct and also now a part of your subjective experience. The only question is what your personal opinion will be from here on out. But I imagine that's always in a state of flux.

Well given that the opinion has formed over those sixty some years of study and observation, I doubt that, while some slight modification cannot be ruled out, it will remain basically unchanged.

What I find ironic is your use of the term, â€œexchangeâ€

Post by **LarsMac** » Thu May 25, 2017 11:02 am

gmc;1509488 wrote: You don't have to be religious to be a member of a cult.

Oxford engliah dictionary

Stalin, in his form of communism, deliberately set out to create a state religion using the same technoques he had learned while training to be a priest he jusy adapted.

Mickiel is not a freethinker when it comes to his belief in god. I suspect it would help him if he could get away from said belief in god but that's my own attitudes colouring my opinion.

You should have a look for these guys on you tube.

The Atheist Experience TV Show

Some of the debates are fascinating and a bit beyond the usual ill informed ad hominem nonsense you get. Don't tell mne anything I had not worked out for myself during my teenage years but learning how to articulate it and put across your point debate helps the development process. A lot of religious people are incapable of thinking beyond what they have been taught ( so are many others come to that especially when it comes to politics)

I have watched a couple of those discussions.

I seldom actually get into those discussion of proving, or disproving "God"

Whether there is a God or not seems irrelevant to me.

It seems one of those things that everyone has to figure out for themselves.

Knowing how other people feel about the subject is far more relevant, because you usually can get along with them better when you know what buttons they have and when not to push them.

(And, when you can get away pushing them.)

Mickiel · Post by **Mickiel** » Sun May 28, 2017 9:11 pm

LarsMac;1509587 wrote: I have watched a couple of those discussions.

I seldom actually get into those discussion of proving, or disproving "God"

Whether there is a God or not seems irrelevant to me.

It seems one of those things that everyone has to figure out for themselves.

Knowing how other people feel about the subject is far more relevant, because you usually can get along with them better when you know what buttons they have and when not to push them.

(And, when you can get away pushing them.)

We don't have to know it all, only a small bit of if it. And then. At. Least understand that.