Poll

What religion are you?

Islam
2 (11.8%)
Christianity
9 (52.9%)
Judaism
2 (11.8%)
Hinduism
0 (0%)
Buddhism
0 (0%)
Confuciousism
0 (0%)
Taoism
0 (0%)
Intelligent Design
0 (0%)
Atheism
4 (23.5%)

Total Members Voted: 15

Voting closed: September 26, 2005, 09:06:02 am

Author Topic: Religion  (Read 4296 times)

Daniel Krispin

  • Guest
Religion
« Reply #75 on: October 01, 2005, 04:12:39 am »
Quote from: Lord J esq
You have “looked at the issue before.” What an anti-intellectual remark! Your only redeeming qualities, Daniel, are your intellectual stylings—your politeness and your respect for others’ points of view. Yet these things seem more shallow than I might have thought. Considering your attitudes on women, I shouldn’t be surprised…but I am disappointed. I suppose I did waste a good deal of my time and efforts.

Science will never persuade one whose mind is made up.


Not anti-intellectual. Tired, rather, and not wishing to bring it up yet again. Look, I hold science and faith apart - the two to me do not conflict. I've chosen my stance upon what I've seen. I should not have mentioned any specifics, as it led to your attempting to explain them based on generalized comments of mine; you, for your part, should have read through my post all the way - you would have realized that I have no intent on pursuing the matter (which, however, I cannot fault you for too greatly, having had it occur to me many a time.) Just please, save the Ad Hominem; it really comes across quite badly. I have far more redeeming qualities than my intellectual nature, you merely do not know me well enough - as such, you are in no wise qualified to make such a judgement upon me. For all you know, I may be your superior in many regards, and to speak thus of me is like a man who taunts a shadow, not knowing what casts it - a foolish endeavour, no doubt. I, for my part, make no such assumptions regarding you - save for once, when I thought you a relativist, and it was my sore mistake. Do not fall into such a trap. Remember also: many of your remarks, so very vehement and prideful, are themselves anti-intellectual in nature. For example, to make assumption that my attitude on women implies shallow thought, and thus makes my views less conclusive, is about as anti-scientific and logic as one may come. In no true course of logic can one render another's argument void simply by using their alleigance to a view to disprove it: in fact, that is one of the logical fallacies. Do, please do, spare the hubris. Contrary to what you may think, you have not all truth, and the mysteries of the universe have not offered themselves all up to you.

And neither bring up our old feud regarding attitudes against women. You are treading perilous ground in attempting to raise flames against me. Know that I live in a household that is essentially run by a woman, peopled my a majority of women; no woman has ever found me rude, or un-polite, nor felt me to have acted badly toward her in any regard. At all times I am chivalrous, holding them my equals or betters. How are you, a man, and one who does not know me save for some few ill-phrased comments of mine upon a message board, qualified to make a better judgement? Truth be told, I should think that most women would, given free choice, wish not for amalgation with men, but for men of noble character - thus, your views would be foreign even to them... my apologies, I find the matter difficult to think through. Why am I descried as having a negative view of womenkind, when if you were to tell them of yours, they would almost surely be aghast at it? Are you attempting a conversion of those who do not wish to be, maybe? I cannot quite understand, and it confuses me greatly. Remember that your views are held in minority by most all the world throughout most all of history, by women included - though you may be ardent in them, do not preach it thus. When you say that, you are no better than that man that descries another saying: 'well, you do not believe in Jesus, and thus are going to hell, so I am not surprised'. For truth, it sounded no different. I respect your opinion, but respect works both ways. Remember that I hold your position to be degrading to women, even as you do mine. And before you cry out in anger against me, consider that your views on this matter are no different than my Christian faith is. If you claim I have a tainted worldview based upon my adherence to that faith, then by the same token must you at needs admit that you, being ardent in a certain belief, have your judgement clouded. Logically, you cannot be correct in all things, nor know all things, nor be all just and righteous. So spare us all from this, I beg you. This topic did not include anything regarding women that you should have found offensive, and to include that was quite frankly a bad choice, and slander, on your part.*

As for your last, how true! Yet, mark this: I said very plainly that my views on the matter were not based upon religious belief. I am a scientist, Lord J, trained as one, to think as one, and an applied one at that - even as you are. I am remaining stubborn because I hold an opposing scientific view - for you to condemn me for holding it is a betrayal of science itself, for without Thales and Anaximander arguing different points, how could we have philosophy? Look carefully, and see that it is you who are so very ardent in your own position; so I will repeat the very line you spoke, only in regards to you: Science will never persuade one whose mind is made up. And I see that all too plainly in you - you have made up your mind, in almost all instances. You are absolutely brittle, and that is why you are so easily angered. I wager you would hold to evolution even if proof were found against it. So please, spare the lecture; you are not pre-eminent over me, nor is it assured that your mind is so much more clever than mine that you can call me a fool - you do me grave discredit to assume that I have not given much consideration to these matters. Remember: fools think themselves wise, but the wise know themselves to be fools. Well, plainly you are not Socratean; I wager you to be Epicurian, but that is just a guess.

*And please, let it die here. No insults between us, no enmity. And respect of other's views. That is how I wish it. I beg you: forget about this whole matter, and let it rest here forgotten. I know you feel strongly... but for the sake of peace. I would be content not to have changed your view at all, only don't hate me so bitterly. Here I appeal to all your reason and logic: what does it avail you to continue this? Will you change my heart? Do we not all know your stance, so why repeat it? Why allow your emotions to master you, for that matter? Look, remember that there are a great number of people that have far worse opinions on women than I. If I am a culprit in that regard, I am certainly upon the minor end - along with most men. Actually, I probably hold women in better regard than 90% of men, so it always confuses me why you single me out with this vehemence. Are there not others you would do better speaking out against, such as those who hold women sub-servient? Really, I'm not worth your effort on the matter.

Now, please, someone, tell me if there was anything ill-spoken in this. I hope it vindicates me of fault, I truly do. If not... I do not want this brought up again, so I may just leave the forums. Just for the sake of peace: Lord J will not be angered, I'll have my peace of mind (and not have to worry if Lord J is eternally wroth with me, which actually does concern me quite greatly - if he leaves me in peace, that will be incentive enough to leave), and the rest will have some semblance of peace. I'm not contributing much more to the forums, anyway, and I should probably find other things to do. If there is danger of this arising again... I'm 21, I have better things to focus my attentions upon. These arguments take too much out of me, too much energy that I should be using elsewhere - as such it is becoming a very ill-advised use of my time. I am beginning to feel like the Preacher of Ecclesiastes: all these endeavours are just vexation of the spirit, and vanity for me. I have considered the science, and found it to provide no comfort of anything, no real truth to me - that is why, Lord J, I did not read your tracts; I no it will benefit me nothing good - and so, maybe, I should just leave the forums. Call it defeat, call it whatever, you can say you've won Lord J, I'm not so proud to care overmuch, and too tired of it to give much care about conceding it. If things turn to this end again, I think it best that I go.

Lord J Esq

  • Moon Stone J
  • Hero of Time (+5000)
  • *
  • Posts: 5463
  • ^_^ "Ayla teach at college level!!"
    • View Profile
Religion
« Reply #76 on: October 01, 2005, 03:49:56 pm »
Your reply is understood, Daniel. I suppose I should have expected you to be offended by my last post rather than moved by it. So I accept all your insults as fair reprisal. And if you should wish to "not read my tracts," then that is your choice too. Or, if you like, you are welcome to leave the Compendium; I won't be sad to see you go. But I accept none of this blame which you assign to me for your cross mood. Leave, or stay, and be as wroth as you like, but your choices are your own. As it ever has been, we are responsible only for ourselves.

I had kept silence against you, until you mentioned me in your new sig thread recently. I figured..."Okay, Josh, you're being spiteful. Talk to the guy. He's been very polite." So...well...maybe talking to you was not the best idea after all. You truly are a believer in courtesy and decency, and I may have been fooled by that into ignoring your underlying philosophy, which is...less admirable. But this is neither here nor there. I do not speak to you for the sake of antagonizing you. I speak in defense of the truth so that your elegance may not beguile others. And looking to the future, when you speak untruths I shall continue to point those out for the benefit of the impressionable, which--rather than for the sake of antagonism itself--has always been my motivation for contradicting you and others here on the forums. Nor will I temper this justice for the sake of your frayed nerves. But I don't want you to feel as though you can never speak your mind around here. So have it from me personally: You can always speak your mind here. And when your words wound the truth, I shall speak my mind as well.

You must have asked yourself more than once by now, "Why does he persist like that? Why should he care so deeply for the truth and so little for good manners?" Why, indeed.

What am I? Not brittle. Not unscientific. Not even angry, in the emotional sense. But I hate to see a victim be made of the truth, and I do not suffer fools. You, for all your intelligence, elegance, and charisma, are that much more troubling of an instigator, because by these rare qualities you are in a position to change people's minds. It's too bad I can't change yours; I suppose I lost that opportunity when we squabbled about the sexism of Christianity. That was my folly, and I admit I am not always as well-mannered as I should be. Like so many of us, I too have a ways to go in growing up. But what am I? I am passionate, and I persist. Take it or leave it.

Burning Zeppelin

  • God of War (+3000)
  • *
  • Posts: 3137
    • View Profile
    • Delicate Cutters
Religion
« Reply #77 on: October 02, 2005, 12:43:15 am »
I knew this thread would turn into a science vs religion, "my views are better than your" thread. But in my opinion both Lord and Daniel are respectable fine men, and therefore this quarell should end (which it already has)