Philosophy Now Forum

yiostheoy wrote: You should read his book and then use him for your avatar.

Alas, your recommendations lack sufficient credibility to enable them to be justifiably acted upon.

Harbal wrote:

yiostheoy wrote: You should read his book and then use him for your avatar.

Alas, your recommendations lack sufficient credibility to enable them to be justifiably acted upon.

You'll find out on your own someday then.

That's the difference between trial and error versus guided discovery.

yiostheoy wrote: That's the difference between trial and error versus guided discovery.

And the difference between you and me is that I am able to work out for myself, the things that you have to read about, in order to learn.

Harbal wrote:

yiostheoy wrote: That's the difference between trial and error versus guided discovery.

And the difference between you and me is that I am able to work out for myself, the things that you have to read about, in order to learn.

Not so far.

yiostheoy wrote:sthitapragya, who is currently on your ignore list, made this post.

Oh please. You don't have it in you to ignore anyone. That would actually require a mind which does not care what others think of them. You just don't have it.

sthitapragya, who is currently on your ignore list, made this post.

yiostheoy wrote:sthitapragya, who is currently on your ignore list, made this post.

You moron. You are letting us know you read the post.

yiostheoy wrote:sthitapragya, who is currently on your ignore list, made this post.

Please read my post. We are all in need of your attention.

Harbal wrote:

yiostheoy wrote: You should read his book and then use him for your avatar.

Alas, your recommendations lack sufficient credibility to enable them to be justifiably acted upon.

Are you just another pretty face?

Riddle me this: Who in their right mind would deny that the concept of God is ineffable while experiencing conceptual non-existence’s ineffable-ness?

Walker wrote:

Harbal wrote:

yiostheoy wrote: You should read his book and then use him for your avatar.

Alas, your recommendations lack sufficient credibility to enable them to be justifiably acted upon.

Are you just another pretty face?

Riddle me this: Who in their right mind would deny that the concept of God is ineffable while experiencing conceptual non-existence’s ineffable-ness?

Who in their right mind would write stuff like this?

sthitapragya wrote: Who in their right mind would write stuff like this?

Nobody. It was Walker who wrote it.

sthitapragya wrote:Who in their right mind would write stuff like this?

As the atheist follows the hard-wire to must rub out, must rub out, he fails to answer the riddle, i.e., address the content.

Stuck on rubbin out, ain't ya.

Walker wrote:

sthitapragya wrote:Who in their right mind would write stuff like this?

As the atheist follows the hard-wire to must rub out, must rub out, he fails to answer the riddle, i.e., address the content.

Stuck on rubbin out, ain't ya.

What is this obsession with rubbing out? Get a room, man. And don't tell us about it.

Oh you must have ignored or missed that. It has been decided that rubbing out is the PC term for destroy.

This is the prime mover for atheists.

To destroy God.

Rub out.

Thus this infects other things.

Such as addressing the content of a discussion.

Walker wrote: As the atheist follows the hard-wire to must rub out, must rub out, he fails to answer the riddle, i.e., address the content.

Stuck on rubbin out, ain't ya.

If that was an attempt at an explanation of something, it failed miserably.