Philosophy Now Forum

Arising_uk wrote:No, what I'm saying is that I sit in judgement upon him from the point of view of philosophy, specifically ethics and politics.

Your statement pretty much sums up why you should not be on philosophy forum but some loony theology or numerology site where you'd be more fitted.

I guess you're saying that the Church of Ouzo and Evensonomics don't qualify as philosophy, which, of course, says a lot about your lack of understanding the subject.

bobevenson wrote:I guess you're saying that the Church of Ouzo and Evensonomics don't qualify as philosophy, which, of course, says a lot about your lack of understanding the subject.

You and your monomania.

But no, it says more about your understanding, as your 'Church of Ouzo' is Theology and Numerology not Philosophy. For it to be philosophy you'd have to be willing to engage in critique. This also applies to your 'Evensonomics' which may well be some form of political philosophy but since it consists of nothing more than a few interminably repeated paragraphs it doesn't deserve the '...ics' nor the term "philosophy".

Arising_uk wrote:

bobevenson wrote:I guess you're saying that the Church of Ouzo and Evensonomics don't qualify as philosophy, which, of course, says a lot about your lack of understanding the subject.

You and your monomania.

But no, it says more about your understanding, as your 'Church of Ouzo' is Theology and Numerology not Philosophy. For it to be philosophy you'd have to be willing to engage in critique. This also applies to your 'Evensonomics' which may well be some form of political philosophy but since it consists of nothing more than a few interminably repeated paragraphs it doesn't deserve the '...ics' nor the term "philosophy".

I'll just let your stupid comments ride and simply point out your "theology is not philosophy" remark.

You're right! Your CofO doesn't even count as Theology. My mistake.

Arising_uk wrote:You're right! Your CofO doesn't even count as Theology.

I'm sure the spokesman for the Spiritual Counterfeits Project would also ignore your stupidity.

But is it true? And the answer is no. As it's all your megalomaniacal monomania.

Yet again your disabilities lead a thread back to you bob.

Arising_uk wrote:But is it true?

Of course "The Ouzo Prophecy" is true; do you seriously think anybody but a prophet could have written it, and if so, for what purpose?

The answer is no bob. The reason is that this 'God' of yours does not exist and neither does this 'future' that you predict. I seriously think only a godbotherering Christian numerology loon with an extreme selective reading ability and blinding confirmation bias could have written such a thing.

Arising_uk wrote:

bobevenson wrote: Do you seriously think anybody but a prophet could have written "The Ouzo Prophecy"?

The answer is no bob.

Thank you for your confirmation.

bobevenson wrote:Thank you for your confirmation.

That's the thing with you bob. Everything confirms for you.

Arising_uk wrote:

bobevenson wrote:Thank you for your confirmation.

That's the thing with you bob. Everything confirms for you.

Yeah, I like it when people agree with me because it shows their intelligence.

And I like when you proceed to prove my every point about your philosophical disabilities.

Arising_uk wrote:And I like when you proceed to prove my every point about your philosophical disabilities.

Oh, oh, you just demonstrated your lack of intelligence.

bobevenson wrote:Oh, oh, you just demonstrated your lack of intelligence.

Thank you once more for proving my point about your philosophical disabilities.

Arising_uk wrote:

bobevenson wrote:Oh, oh, you just demonstrated your lack of intelligence.

Thank you once more for proving my point about your philosophical disabilities.

Whoops, another sign of your lack of intelligence.