What is your problem?

My problems are:

Item 1. The fallacy of the excluded middle.

Item 2. People on either side of a debate that both use item (1).

Item 3. Painting with too broad a brush.

Item 4. Guilt By Association.

Item 5. People who think they are certain of things that they cannot possibly be certain of.
 
Hurricane Angel said:
That's because usually people place freedom of speech above respect.
Click to expand...

Freedom of speech is like exploration, discovery and crossing boundaries. This is for people who quest for truth, not for children who revel in pointless cruelty.

Respect is a human construct often littered with unnatural moralizing in which things like bibles, qurans and torahs have had a disproportionate say. The honor of deeds through a threshold of aptitude gotten from good breeding among other things needs to come back and replace the antiquated universalist dogma from outdated tomes.
 
In this way we have a reality-based respect reinforced by fear or love, rather than an assumed general respect, that ironically people do not naturally tend to respect!

Imagine walking up to Conan the Barbarian and calling him a punk. Feared respect.

Imagine walking up to Socrates and calling him a punk. Loving respect.

Now walk up to an everyday equal Joe off the street and call him a punk. He probably is a punk.
 
I have a problem with people that stopped learning in middle school and are extremely undereducated in basic physics and logic. Hey idiots! Educate and think for yourselves!
 
usp8riot said:
I think respect should be given by default.
Click to expand...

why do you think that? i think the law ensures a level of respect by default. respect that your property is your property, that you cannot wantonly harm someone physically...etc. why should you be given any respect by default other than that?
 
when you first meet someone, respect is given by default, but you do get people who are arrogant, and expect you to lick there feet, they only deserve a modicum of respect until they cross the line, then if they have'nt earned it they dont get.

I owned a bar for a few years in spain, when I served people it was in the order they arrived, I had a couple sitting at a table, I walked to the table before theirs, they started clicking there finger and said can we have, I said one moment please, in fairness they did wait a minute.
then came the time for the bill, and an arguement ensued(Well a one sided arguement, I ain't going to argue trivial shit, but I ain't going to be talked down too, either.) regarding a class of fizzy water, 10p in english money, they started to swear and be extremely rude they had'nt even drunk to much, so I said you have'nt got to pay anything, so f**k off, and walked away, the man followed me in, he said do you know who I am, I said I could'nt give a f**k if you were the king of england, f**k off.
he than said I was'nt surposed to talk to customers like that, I said so I have to except your rudeness, well then let that be a lesson to you, where I come from, you only get respect if you earn it, and you ain't earned any, so f**k off.
 
Last edited:
Adstar said:
I don't really have any mayor problems. :D


All Praise The Ancient Of Days
Click to expand...
local mayor's can be a problem, however ken livinstone (mayor of london) is'nt a problem.

(sarcasm)lol
 
1) Preaching the stuff as though it were fact.

2) Promoting it into in the public domain (i.e. politics and public policy).
Click to expand...

Those are my two main problems too, but I would just like to add a third:

3) A religious person is more prone to war or conflict of any kind. Most flag burnings are done by crazy religious people too... Blatant division by way of religion is guarunteed war at some point.
 
Adstar said:
I don't really have any mayor problems. :D

All Praise The Ancient Of Days
Click to expand...

*************
M*W: Really, now? I would say that not being in touch with reality is a major problem.
 
“I have made a ceaseless effort not to ridicule, not to bewail, not to scorn human actions, but to understand them.” – Spinoza

My problem is that too few people have the wisdom of Spinoza.
 
Spinoza, was asking the impossible there.
how could you possibly understand, the inanely stupid murderous religious human animal, especially as Spinoza was an intelligent man. I'm glad I dont have the ? wisdom of spinoza, as I could'nt possibly understand, that irrational side of humanity
 
geeser said:
Spinoza, was asking the impossible there.
how could you possibly understand, the inanely stupid murderous religious human animal, especially as Spinoza was an intelligent man. I'm glad I dont have the ? wisdom of spinoza, as I could'nt possibly understand, that irrational side of humanity
Click to expand...

Suit yourself, I tend to think that human actions, even the irrational ones, have causes and that much of our behavior results from our evolutionary past.

Moreover, there have been stupid murderous non-religious human animals as well as stupid murderous religious ones. There are also stupid murderous chimpanzee animals that bear a great resemblance to us not only genetically but in their disposition towards war and I highly doubt they are motivated by religious concepts.
 
Lerxst said:
Suit yourself, I tend to think that human actions, even the irrational ones, have causes and that much of our behavior results from our evolutionary past.

Moreover, there have been stupid murderous non-religious human animals as well as stupid murderous religious ones. There are also stupid murderous chimpanzee animals that bear a great resemblance to us not only genetically but in their disposition towards war and I highly doubt they are motivated by religious concepts.
Click to expand...

first of all, chimpanzees dont engage in warfare in any human sense. in addition to that, while their genome may bear remarkable similarity to ours, the ways in which it is different are most important in that they differentiate the size and capacity of our brains and our ability to understand and make practical use of complex ideas. retarded people can fight with each other too, probably even kill each other, but its not war in terms of cause or scale. the fact here is that most war in the human world has had religion to blame as its primary or secondary motivator. often there are a mixture of causal elements, ie: sometimes greed has been the cause of wars, but the stated purpose and public face of the war was religious in nature in order to ignite mass furor in support of it.
 
superluminal said:
Ok. I've realized that my real problem with religion is not that people believe in unprovable, mystical things (it does personally irritate me though and I will constantly debate people simply in an attempt to figure out what the hell they could be thinking. Pffftt). My problem is twofold:

1) Preaching the stuff as though it were fact.

2) Promoting it into in the public domain (i.e. politics and public policy).

This, I believe, requires responsible and intelligent citizens and forumites(?) to be as agressive and relentless in the countering of religious pronouncements as they are in pushing them.

What's your problem?
Click to expand...

Problem??? Is there a problem with believing in something and telling people that you believe it?
When people go on and say "Well how can you believe that" then you start quoting from the Bible, they get pissed because your preaching. What's the problem there?
I believe in God, maybe you may think it's unrealistic but that's your problem.
Not to sound mean, but the problem of yours is a problem I have too.
 
charles cure said:
first of all, chimpanzees dont engage in warfare in any human sense. in addition to that, while their genome may bear remarkable similarity to ours, the ways in which it is different are most important in that they differentiate the size and capacity of our brains and our ability to understand and make practical use of complex ideas. retarded people can fight with each other too, probably even kill each other, but its not war in terms of cause or scale. the fact here is that most war in the human world has had religion to blame as its primary or secondary motivator. often there are a mixture of causal elements, ie: sometimes greed has been the cause of wars, but the stated purpose and public face of the war was religious in nature in order to ignite mass furor in support of it.
Click to expand...

Certainly chimps cannot make war on our scale or with any sense of strategy or political purpose - I'm merely talking about the underlying evolutionary forces that favor within-group amity and between-group emnity. Add a competition for resources and voila, all the root cause elements are in place, sans religion. Sure, organized religion adds addtitional motivation and rationalization and dumps copious fuel on the fire. But so can certain secular political ideologies too. To label religion as the universal root cause is too facile. Nationalism is more to blame. Hitler certainly thought he doing God's will, I'm sure, but I wouldn't consider religion a primary or even secondary motivation for his aggression. Nationalism and hatred of "outsiders" can be more than enough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top