Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sun Jul 09, 2023 5:31 am
Those who are NOT moderators but try to boss others around [complaining about raising too many threads] should just shut the F up.
It seems like you managed to break your own rule in one sentence. LOL.
The reason I complain about your use of threads is not because there are too many, but they extend discussions that are already started in other threads. This forum has nearly no moderation at all. Other forums with moderation will often have threads where moderators combine threads on the same topic, because it makes navigating and following discussions easier. Further it makes for a better signal to noise ratio when trying to see what new topics are. Since we lack any moderation at all here, yes, I complained about your way of constantly jumping to new threads when your posts could easily be in already existant threads. I expressed my opinion. You expressed yours with an expletive. Hypocrite.
You are often labeling people or their posts as naive, barbaric, ignorant and so on. And you start that game. I accept that given there is no moderation, that also will continue. But perhaps now and then I will use the imperative in relation to them, just as you do.
Notice that in fact I was correct. There was an implicit argument in this thread. The horrible thing I did was to repeatedly ask, then use the imperative to prompt you to present your implicit argument in your thread. What a terrible thing to do. You could simply have ignored my request.
The imperative mood in English is generally used to give an order, to prompt someone to do something, to give a warning or to give instructions.
I promted you. Which you call bossing other people around and then, let's be charitable, you 'prompt' me using 'fuck' in your prompt, to not prompt you.
I raised a listing of the many causes of Experiencing God.
Listing of Causes in Experiencing God
viewtopic.php?t=40346
Right, in another thread.
This OP is related to a specific caused by temporal epilepsy and evident within brain activities.
As such the claim that God exists is caused by this kind of mental illness.
Nope. It might be in some cases. You know I have cut you a lot of slack, given that English is not your native language. But know the above sentences do not make sense. As written they are saying that when people calim there is a God it is caused by this kind of mental illness. This is incorrect in two ways:
1) not everyone who claims there is a God has epilepsy.
2) epilepsy is not a mental illness.
Unless you have some statistics that epilepsy is incrededibly more widespread than the experts believe, your claim above is incorrect, though I do not assume it is caused by a mental illness.
It is believed and claimed [no direct proofs] that the majority of founders of religions [Jesus, Muhammad,], religious leaders and spiritual groups suffered from some degree of temporal epilepsy.
This OP will add additional evidence to support the above belief.
It doesn't do that. Unless one epilelptic hearing Bach music - a real side effect of some seizures in an indiividual - shows that people hearing Bach music but who can't prove it was coming from some musical device are epileptics. The side effect of having neighbors who sometimes play classical music (or do they) with their windows open, but not that loudly playing that music.
In the OP, I asked for "views" [on topic].
Different people will have different views to the above.
Perhaps, someone has read the above is a false research, so offer his evidence.
Someone may have something additional to add.
In a more active forum, there will be a range of views from various posters.
And I knew that the OP was part of some unstated argument, given the title of thread and your position in general. So, I presented an implicit argument, which you seemed not to understand, given your response. Then I pointed out that you still hadn't make the implicit argument explicit. And it would be a weak argument, so I wanted to see it. And asked for it. Asked for it.
Then after silence, I posted
The implicit argument doesn't work.
I see you started a new thread, instead of dealing with the implicit arguement here.
This allows you to link and repeat and not really respond.
No bossing around.
Finally, thank you, you actually post, the beginnings of an argument here, as if anyone reading the OP would think you were implying in the OP that the focus was on the people who started religions or were major contributors. Many would have assumed you meant anyone who has religious experiences is suffering from something like epilepsy.
All the OP shows is that one patient in Israel had an experience during an epilepic seizure. That goes nowhere in demonstrating that most people, let alone important figures in religion based their religious ideas on their own epileptic experiences. Further the problem with the implicit argument, which you still haven't managed to actually state, is that we can trigger the brain to think it is experiencing all sorts of things. Epileptics, for example, will experience during seizures, music and smells and sounds of things that are not present. However these things are all real, but not present at that time. So, just because anomolous experiences can trigger the experience of something, gives us NO evidence that that thing does not exist.
And since we know that religious experiences can be experienced during meditation, in nature (for 40 days or, for example, in the various Native American vision quests), during chanting, while dancing, during prayer and a whole host of situations and practices, all of them having to do with actitivity that have no connection to any kind of illness
your
implicit
argument
lacks charity AND is an extremely weak argument.
It's actually rather nasty.
And if you are suddenly feeling the urge to say there is no evidence for God, you would be showing that you don't understand that YOUR argument is being criticized. Your argument can be weak and fallacious AND other arguments with people you disagree with can be weak and fallacious at the same time. So, jumping to arguments not made in YOUR thread would bear on the argument you made, its justification (next to none) or the criticism I wrote.
)