Philosophy Now Forum

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu May 29, 2025 1:52 am

accelafine wrote: ↑Thu May 29, 2025 1:48 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu May 29, 2025 1:41 am

Tennis was my favorite sport when I was in shape to play. Seems like fun to me.

I meant like watching a tennis match 'crowd'.

When I played it, I enjoyed watching it too, just to get pointers on how to improve my own game. I don't like sitting around in a philosophy forum and just agreeing with everything all by myself. I'd rather see people defend their points against people who are opposed to them instead of just debating with me. It's the best way I know of to learn.

For fuck sake. How many times do you need something spelt out for you?

accelafine wrote: ↑Thu May 29, 2025 3:40 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu May 29, 2025 1:52 am

accelafine wrote: ↑Thu May 29, 2025 1:48 am

I meant like watching a tennis match 'crowd'.

When I played it, I enjoyed watching it too, just to get pointers on how to improve my own game. I don't like sitting around in a philosophy forum and just agreeing with everything all by myself. I'd rather see people defend their points against people who are opposed to them instead of just debating with me. It's the best way I know of to learn.

For fuck sake. How many times do you need something spelt out for you?

Until there's a consensus.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu May 29, 2025 7:00 am

accelafine wrote: ↑Thu May 29, 2025 3:40 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu May 29, 2025 1:52 am

When I played it, I enjoyed watching it too, just to get pointers on how to improve my own game. I don't like sitting around in a philosophy forum and just agreeing with everything all by myself. I'd rather see people defend their points against people who are opposed to them instead of just debating with me. It's the best way I know of to learn.

For fuck sake. How many times do you need something spelt out for you?

Until there's a consensus.

Ok. So you like watching a crowd of people swivelling their heads from side to side. Good for you, fatty boomsticks. I____don't____care...

accelafine wrote: ↑Thu May 29, 2025 1:16 am ''I don't like the word 'atheist' because it implies that there's a God to not believe in.''

--Eric Idle.

One of the cleverest and funniest quotes I've ever heard.

This is priceless irony.

It’s like those who have already concluded there is no God feel a compulsive necessity go on to debate the legitimacy of such an idea with those who have concluded there is a God.
It’s like those who have already concluded there is no God feel it necessary to defend their position, even while also knowing they could potentially be wrong about the idea of a God or a No God. It’s ultimately about whether conceptual ideas are real and true, that nobody really knows anything about except as a blind empty belief.
That’s why any God debate is always going to need to be a consensual exchange of ideas as though approval and validation is of sovereign importance and can only be achieved by engaging in endless back and forth thought loops until a mutual clarity is restored by all, which is impossible to arrive at, and yet nobody seems to want to accept that fact, so will continue endlessly arguing in vain.

And yet, it’s ultimately about an idea that’s too abstract and beyond human reasoning, where in fact no one can actually know for absolute certainty what they are talking about, except to convince themselves of in the form of simple blind empty belief. That’s the absurdity of discussing ideas about ideas no one has any clue about except as a blind belief.

I personally think the main reason for debating the God subject springs from the fear of some people spreading misinformation to vulnerable gullible others and that that may be seen as an opportunity to impose a form of mental and emotional abuse on others which is seen as unacceptable and ought to be stopped immediately.

Most People want seek for truth, not misinformation, so some people will eagerly participate in fighting against what they are convinced of being a persistent and deliberate act of “false information” spreading,a manipulation of the innocent masses.
Fighting an unjustified belief in favour of some alternative reasonable actual real truth, according to them.

That’s what the whole God argument is about, it’s not about whether there’s a God or not anymore, it’s about the fear of misinformation which seems to be a very serious problematic issue for some people. But then there’s other people who just couldn’t care less about anything other than just living for living sake, and simply live life without ever the need to make it all about some God that may or may not exist.

I never really got into tennis at school. Football, that is, soccer to our American cousins, was ok, but my favourite was field hockey. Those sticks could be lethal weapons in the right hands.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu May 29, 2025 7:00 am Until there's a consensus.

The consensus is that we should never agree on anything.

"but my favourite was field hockey. Those sticks could be lethal weapons in the right hands"

Coach: "We're playing the Birmingham Bobcats next week, ladies."

Team midfielder: "Bloody hell, mates. That's Maia's team... that blind striker that put a fullback and sweeper in the hospital last week during the playoffs.

promethean75 wrote: ↑Thu May 29, 2025 4:58 pm "but my favourite was field hockey. Those sticks could be lethal weapons in the right hands"

Coach: "We're playing the Birmingham Bobcats next week, ladies."

Team midfielder: "Bloody hell, mates. That's Maia's team... that blind striker that put a fullback and sweeper in the hospital last week during the playoffs.

Hehe, if only. We just played against other blind and VI teams, sadly, as the game was a bit different (primarily, the ball had a bell in it).

Wait, I thought you were kidding. They actually have blind field hockey. I absolutely did not know that.

promethean75 wrote: ↑Thu May 29, 2025 8:13 pm Wait, I thought you were kidding. They actually have blind field hockey. I absolutely did not know that.

Yes, very much so. It was very popular at school. You can use the stick like a cane, as well as for battering people with.

and then the farmer's wife appears...

-Imp

1 old blind man vs 20 young blind men. What could possibly go right?

More hands on the elephant to arrive at a consensus of reality, if they all tell the truth and nothing but the truth.

Walker wrote: ↑Fri May 30, 2025 3:11 pm 1 old blind man vs 20 young blind men. What could possibly go right?

More hands on the elephant to arrive at a consensus of reality, if they all tell the truth and nothing but the truth.

That story about the blind men and the elephant, while it's clear, of course, what it's trying to say, is actually complete rubbish, and whoever thought it up really should have considered consulting some actual blind people before trumpeting such tosh, or packing his trunk and saying goodbye to the circus of common sense. The elephant in the room is that it's completely obvious when you're standing next to some huge, great stonking animal, such as, for example, an elephant, and you wouldn't have to even touch it to know this.

Maia wrote: ↑Sat May 31, 2025 9:08 am

Walker wrote: ↑Fri May 30, 2025 3:11 pm 1 old blind man vs 20 young blind men. What could possibly go right?

More hands on the elephant to arrive at a consensus of reality, if they all tell the truth and nothing but the truth.

That story about the blind men and the elephant, while it's clear, of course, what it's trying to say, is actually complete rubbish, and whoever thought it up really should have considered consulting some actual blind people before trumpeting such tosh, or packing his trunk and saying goodbye to the circus of common sense. The elephant in the room is that it's completely obvious when you're standing next to some huge, great stonking animal, such as, for example, an elephant, and you wouldn't have to even touch it to know this.

When you stand next to the big stinker you only know that side of the elephant.

The person on the other side only knows that side. The twos of yous can communicate what you experience within your reach, and so it goes with the person on the other side, but you need to trust that the one on the other side is objective and truthful in their reporting, and not just using their time to bitch about your description from your side of the great beast.

No eye has ever seen an elephant.

No eye has ever seen a God.

There’s nothing outside of the nondual seeing eye.