Page 1250 of 1324

Re: Christianity

Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2025 9:38 pm
by Alexis Jacobi
What am I, the clod on the bus, missing?
Why have you come to this site PN and why this particular thread?

Re: Christianity

Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2025 9:39 pm
by Martin Peter Clarke
And sin is a metaphor, an obsolete poetic place holder, for abuse of power. Which is all around us. You can see it and smell it and hear it and touch it and taste it. It's not metaphoric.

Re: Christianity

Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2025 9:41 pm
by Martin Peter Clarke
Alexis Jacobi wrote: Mon Aug 11, 2025 9:38 pm
What am I, the clod on the bus, missing?
Why have you come to this site PN and why this particular thread?
Because I was a Christian for 50 years.

And I have a unique, please prove me wrong, happy to be, valid critique of it as being demonstrably purely natural due to its fundamental moral inadequacies.

And why are you here?

Re: Christianity

Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2025 9:44 pm
by Will Bouwman
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Mon Aug 11, 2025 8:19 am Has metaphysics gained any more knowledge than religion, outside sensory experience?

(A good thread title in itself methinks.)
Metaphysics isn't about knowledge; it's about interpreting knowledge. Religion is what you do when you have fuck all knowledge.

Re: Christianity

Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2025 9:47 pm
by Martin Peter Clarke
Will Bouwman wrote: Mon Aug 11, 2025 9:44 pm
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Mon Aug 11, 2025 8:19 am Has metaphysics gained any more knowledge than religion, outside sensory experience?

(A good thread title in itself methinks.)
Metaphysics isn't about knowledge; it's about interpreting knowledge. Religion is what you do when you have fuck all knowledge.
And the interpretation of knowledge, like Goedel's, can't produce knowledge? Open question. Religion is what you do to knowledge, with knowledge, after unwarranted, unjustified, untrue belief.

I feel Alexis is trying to do that with metaphysics.

Time for a smoke.

Re: Christianity

Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2025 10:04 pm
by Martin Peter Clarke
Red, formerly Sweet, Orient.

If you, Alexis, are defending Christian thought as part of the development of, even the barely, glacially slow, net progressive history of ideas, I agree. We couldn't have done any better. Obviously. Because we are so naturally constrained in morality. Giving all possible good will to Jesus of Nazareth and his remarkable mother and culture, he probably would be, objectively, the greatest person in history. His God was a monster.

Tea, Tamnavulin, dark grapes and chocolate now.

Re: Christianity

Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2025 10:25 pm
by Will Bouwman
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Mon Aug 11, 2025 9:47 pm...the interpretation of knowledge, like Goedel's, can't produce knowledge? Open question. Religion is what you do to knowledge, with knowledge, after unwarranted, unjustified, untrue belief.

I feel Alexis is trying to do that with metaphysics.

Time for a smoke.
I have the impression this isn't your first this evening. Why Goedel in particular? Alexis, among the odious halfwits who pollute this site, at least has the presence of mind to admit some humility and can, on occasion, be funny (well done, Gus).

Re: Christianity

Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2025 10:38 pm
by Alexis Jacobi
Will Bouwman wrote: Mon Aug 11, 2025 9:44 pm Metaphysics isn't about knowledge; it's about interpreting knowledge. Religion is what you do when you have fuck all knowledge.
That is simply false. I mean you are making a statement that is do highly prejudiced — and you are fully entitled to your view, naturally — but religion cannot be dismissed as an option for those with “fuck all” knowledge.

Your critique seems specific to specific religionists.

You are certainly right though about metaphysics as interpretation.

Re: Christianity

Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2025 10:45 pm
by Alexis Jacobi
Will Bouwman wrote: Mon Aug 11, 2025 10:25 pm Alexis, among the odious halfwits who pollute this site
See that is actually one of the cores that undergirds all sorts of discord, in many areas, on many levels: hyper-arrogance.

Though I could interpret it favorably:
There is Alexis, the Hyperborean Apollo, down among the half-wits, shining a Golden Light …
Yes! I like that better. Thanks, Wilbur!

Re: Christianity

Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2025 11:11 pm
by Martin Peter Clarke
Alexis Jacobi wrote: Mon Aug 11, 2025 10:45 pm
Will Bouwman wrote: Mon Aug 11, 2025 10:25 pm Alexis, among the odious halfwits who pollute this site
See that is actually one of the cores that undergirds all sorts of discord, in many areas, on many levels: hyper-arrogance.

Though I could interpret it favorably:
There is Alexis, the Hyperborean Apollo, down among the half-wits, shining a Golden Light …
Yes! I like that better. Thanks, Wilbur!
: ) Alexis, you might annoy the hell out of me, but abuse like yours Will, is just not acceptable. And worse, it always redounds negatively to the abuser. You lose credibility.

Re: Christianity

Posted: Mon Aug 11, 2025 11:14 pm
by Martin Peter Clarke
Will Bouwman wrote: Mon Aug 11, 2025 10:25 pm
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Mon Aug 11, 2025 9:47 pm...the interpretation of knowledge, like Goedel's, can't produce knowledge? Open question. Religion is what you do to knowledge, with knowledge, after unwarranted, unjustified, untrue belief.

I feel Alexis is trying to do that with metaphysics.

Time for a smoke.
I have the impression this isn't your first this evening. Why Goedel in particular? Alexis, among the odious halfwits who pollute this site, at least has the presence of mind to admit some humility and can, on occasion, be funny (well done, Gus).
It was my first, and, alas, not weed. Can't find my Pax Mini. Goedel as an analogy with his 2bd theory of incompleteness. I have nothing to [be] humble about.

PS So, what ought I to be be humble about?

Re: Christianity

Posted: Tue Aug 12, 2025 12:57 am
by Alexis Jacobi
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Mon Aug 11, 2025 11:11 pm : ) Alexis, you might annoy the hell out of me, but abuse like yours [of?] Will, is just not acceptable. And worse, it always redounds negatively to the abuser. You lose credibility.
Think it through: How much credibility did I start with? What have I actually lost? Eh?

I think Will is just wonderful. I say that sincerely.

Re: Christianity

Posted: Tue Aug 12, 2025 1:13 am
by Alexis Jacobi
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Mon Aug 11, 2025 9:41 pm And why are you here?
I make it clear all the time, and I did again just recently. I am very interested in the cultural-political shift that is on-going. I am interested in, I became interested in, ultra-conservatism: the absolute metaphysical version of ur-conservatism. That led me to a consideration of “essences” (like quintessences). Nietzsche (principally Genealogy of Morals) had a large effect on me, as did Richard Weaver. Richard Weaver deals on moments in the ideational realm where missteps are taken. I am therefore, really interested in missteps and, naturally, the corrective movement — which certainly involves metaphysics.

Re: Christianity

Posted: Tue Aug 12, 2025 8:21 am
by Martin Peter Clarke
Alexis Jacobi wrote: Tue Aug 12, 2025 12:57 am
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Mon Aug 11, 2025 11:11 pm : ) Alexis, you might annoy the hell out of me, but abuse like yours [of?] Will, is just not acceptable. And worse, it always redounds negatively to the abuser. You lose credibility.
Think it through: How much credibility did I start with? What have I actually lost? Eh?

I think Will is just wonderful. I say that sincerely.
No 'of'. Will is the abuser.

Re: Christianity

Posted: Tue Aug 12, 2025 8:34 am
by Martin Peter Clarke
Alexis Jacobi wrote: Tue Aug 12, 2025 1:13 am
Martin Peter Clarke wrote: Mon Aug 11, 2025 9:41 pm And why are you here?
I make it clear all the time, and I did again just recently. I am very interested in the cultural-political shift that is on-going. I am interested in, I became interested in, ultra-conservatism: the absolute metaphysical version of ur-conservatism. That led me to a consideration of “essences” (like quintessences). Nietzsche (principally Genealogy of Morals) had a large effect on me, as did Richard Weaver. Richard Weaver deals on moments in the ideational realm where missteps are taken. I am therefore, really interested in missteps and, naturally, the corrective movement — which certainly involves metaphysics.
Good luck. I see no missteps, no corrective movement. Just bio-psycho-sociological determinism. Including in Christianity. Metaphysics just reinforces that.