Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online
0 registered (), 328 Guests and 1 Spider online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters (30 Days)
Page 106 of 120 < 1 2 ... 104 105 106 107 108 ... 119 120 >
Topic Options
#48584 - 04/30/13 03:17 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: samwik]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Keeping this response brief, may I simply say,
Quote:
Sam, thanks for making it clear that you accept that, "anthropomorphizing leads to many misunderstandings and should be avoided".
And I should have prefaced what I said as follows: The following question is the kind of one that atheists often pressure theists to raise. "Why don't you ask your 'god' the following?"
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
... "God, why do you allow so much pain and suffering, especially the kind inflicted on the innocent and on children, on the planet we call 'mother earth?'"
Because, like you, I have long since stopped thinking anthropomorphically of such a god. Therefore, for me it is no longer a pertinent question.

To which you respond
Quote:
Yes, it is impertinent; but that is the way of children, and can be forgiven.

Should a mother try to shape, mould, and educate her children; teach them of value and consequence? [...asked rhetorically] ... [Here may I add: IMO, parents educate, pass on their values and shape the lives of their children more by their actions than by what they say. I like saying: Morally good and true religion is about doing good DEEDS, not about spouting CREEDS.]

On a related track:
From whence does value arise? What do we value? How is value established? Where is the source of value?

~ smile


Edited by Revlgking (04/30/13 03:30 AM)
Edit Reason: Always helpful!
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
.
#48586 - 04/30/13 04:25 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: samwik]
samwik Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/10/06
Posts: 1164
Loc: Colorado
Thanks for clarifying all that, Revl. With that settled, I'm hoping to get back to dialog....

Originally Posted By: samwik
....I'm assuming you saw my link from above, about how God needed a caretaker, so on the eighth day created Farmers. Based on that assumption, and what I wrote about the Bible serving as a "first" Farmer's Almanac, I thought you might see some interesting connections with the "Creation Care" movements that are currently popular with many religions. Have you learned or heard of these notions? Do these notions, concepts, areas, or ideas seem related? If so, do you see ways for information about one notion/idea to support and develop the related ideas/areas?


These are often also local issues, and so offer many opportunities for "deeds" to be effected. Are there any "Farmer's Markets" in your area?
~
_________________________
Pyrolysis creates reduced carbon! ...Time for the next step in our evolutionary symbiosis with fire.

Top
#48587 - 04/30/13 04:34 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Tutor Turtle]
samwik Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/10/06
Posts: 1164
Loc: Colorado
Originally Posted By: Tutor Turtle
Quote:

From whence does value arise?
All that is.
Self measure, attachment, ego.
Depends on your point of reference.

Quote:

What do we value?
That would be a matter of either self idealization, or Self Realization.

Quote:

How is value established?
Through the levels of conscious awareness, understanding and experience, we choose that which we feel adds value or definition to our selves, in our relationship with life.

Quote:

Where is the source of value?

It's the same source of all things. How it is filtered thru awareness in differing states of consciousness, experience and the ego's influence within the identification of individuality determines the way we identify or imagine it.


Thanks, TT! That is a very thorough metaphysical answer, but I was hoping for more mundane suggestions... say, from the perspective of farmers, or refugees, or the homeless or hungry or in some other way insecure, or the marginally secure or very secure, or even from particular religious or political/ethical perspectives.

Food will get you through times of no gold, better than gold will get you through times of no food.


...the sort of "values" cited here.

~ wink
_________________________
Pyrolysis creates reduced carbon! ...Time for the next step in our evolutionary symbiosis with fire.

Top
#48605 - 05/01/13 03:54 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Turner]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Ah.. Idealism in regards to something like herding cats! (Assuming there is a way to get everyone to think and act in accord to one system of reality)
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#48607 - 05/01/13 10:08 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Turner]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Sam, you say,
Quote:
Thanks, TT! That is a very thorough metaphysical answer, but I was hoping for more mundane suggestions... say, from the perspective of farmers, or refugees, or the homeless or hungry or in some other way insecure, or the marginally secure or very secure, or even from particular religious or political/ethical perspectives.
AMEN! Sam
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#48681 - 05/16/13 02:15 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Turner]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
THE UNIVERSE AS A THING OF WONDER

In another forum, I sent a personal "comment to Albert Einstein". Here is what I said. Albert, I understand that, like me, you understand that there is no personal, subjective, or objective being with dimensions running the universe, which some call God.

However, it seems that you do acknowledge that the universe is by nature a miraculous thing--a thing of wonder; that there is that--if we will it so and choose that it be so, which, as I put it, is god-like. It generates, organizes and delivers (G~0~D) that which is good, omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent, and desirable (G~O~D).

Meanwhile, I am waiting to hear from "him", soon.


Edited by Revlgking (05/16/13 02:21 AM)
Edit Reason: Always helpful!
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#48682 - 05/16/13 03:13 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Revlgking]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Originally Posted By: Revlgking


In another forum, I sent a personal "comment to Albert Einstein". Here is what I said. Albert, I understand that, like me, you understand that there is no personal, subjective, or objective being with dimensions running the universe, which some call God.

Addressing the dead, making assumptions in comparison to your own beliefs to the dead, and waiting for a response from the dead is a thing of wonder... sick
Quote:

....if we will it so and choose that it be so, which, as I put it, is god-like. It generates, organizes and delivers (G~0~D) that which is good, omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent, and desirable (G~O~D).


Aren't you contradicting yourself? In the first paragraph you claim that you believe there is no subjective or objective being with dimensions running the universe.
In the second paragraph you claim to believe that if WE will the universe to be so, that we run the universe as something that is a subjective, objective and dimensional product of a subjective, objective and dimensional collection of personalities identified as WE.
Quote:

Meanwhile, I am waiting to hear from "him", soon.

Good luck with that. Maybe when you're dead you can meet him in common grounds. wink
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#48684 - 05/16/13 10:40 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Originally Posted By: Tutor Turtle
[quote=Revlgking] ... Good luck with that. Maybe when you're dead you can meet him in common grounds. wink
To Sam, Bill S and others: Ah, it seems that some posters lack a sense of humour and an imagination. SAD,eh! frown
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#48928 - 06/26/13 10:43 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Turner]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Sam et al: Here is the thread that I told SAGGO about earlier. Please check it out. It is a dialogue I am having with a poster named Arminius--ARM I call him. He is quite a thinker at the www.wondercafe.ca forum. This is brief exchange we had, recently.

Quote:
====================================================
ARM, let us have a dialogue. Here goes:
Originally Posted By: Arminius
ARM: I think Moses' definition of God as "I AM" is a good one (definition) because it essentially is beyond definition.

LGK: Arm, I agree. It sounds good--that is, G~0~D-like and it is enlightened to me! With a polite nod to Rene Descartes, I like to say, "I AM! Therefore, I have Will-power. It is the power to think, to know, to do and to grow. What more do we need, eh!

ARM: God just is: Being. Limitless. Being, of course, is experienced, moment by precious moment. In defining experience, and believing the definition to be what we experience, we limit experience to a particular set of definitions.

ARM: But in just being, pure being, pure unconceptualized being, as in meditation, we experience God.

LGK: Please continue!

ARM: The Taoist word for God is TAO.

The TAO that can be told is not the TAO (The Way). -Lao Tsu

LGK: It is reported that a Lutheran reformer put it this way: "A god understood is no god at all. It is an idol held in the mind."

So true! So many of us are guilty of creating 'gods' in our own image.

Arm, I conclude my part of this dialogue with my answer to the question--How do you define 'god'?--by saying, I DON'T, I simply tune in to, or connect with, my personal physical, mental and spiritual experiences--warts and all. Then I seek to grow--somatically, psychologically and pneumatologically, from there. Questions and comments are welcome!


Edited by Revlgking (06/27/13 12:57 AM)
Edit Reason: Always helpful!
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#48930 - 06/27/13 02:57 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Revlgking]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Went there and looked it up. The dialogue is contrived.
You inserted his words from his conversations with other folks and concocted a fake dialogue. Are you so in need of attention that you make crap up to draw attention to yourself?
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#48949 - 06/30/13 04:09 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Originally Posted By: Tutor Turtle
Went there and looked it up. The dialogue is contrived.

You inserted his words from his conversations with other folks and concocted a fake dialogue. Are you so in need of attention that you make crap up to draw attention to yourself?
Well, well well! TT--the turtle.

It seems that TT no longer claims to be the "genius" he once was ... just a curious turtle. And what an interesting, "gracious" and rhetorical question it is, eh! wink. This should help this thread reach the six-million--6,000,000--hit mark, easily. THANX!

Now let's ask Arminius--a truly humble, helpful promoter of harmony, community and dialogue: What do you think ARM?
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#48950 - 06/30/13 04:13 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Revlgking]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
HEY! everybody. I just took a look. We are now OVER 6,000,000 hits--6,005,502 to be exact. Hurrah!

LORD, it is hard to be a truly humble EGO, eh? Oh WELL! There is only one thing to do. Relax and enjoy it! cool


Edited by Revlgking (06/30/13 04:22 AM)
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#48952 - 06/30/13 01:09 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Revlgking]
Arminius
Unregistered


Originally Posted By: Revlgking
Originally Posted By: Tutor Turtle
Went there and looked it up. The dialogue is contrived.

You inserted his words from his conversations with other folks and concocted a fake dialogue. Are you so in need of attention that you make crap up to draw attention to yourself?
Well, well well! TT--the turtle.

It seems that TT no longer claims to be the "genius" he once was ... just a curious turtle. And what an interesting, "gracious" and rhetorical question it is, eh! wink. This should help this thread reach the six-million--6,000,000--hit mark, easily. THANX!

Now let's ask Arminius--a truly humble, helpful promoter of harmony, community and dialogue: What do you think ARM?



No, TT, the dialogue is not contrived. On the "Religion and Faith" forum of www.wondercafe.ca one can insert any specific block of text to which one wants to reply, and then reply.

But I am not as "truly humble" as Revlgking suggests. Quite the opposite, I am truly conceited. After all, being one with God is the highest possible conceit.

However, it is also the deepest possible humility--but only if one believes God to be the self-creative totality of being!

If one believes God to be the self-creative totality of being, then the sense of oneself as a separate ego-individual disappears, and one becomes one with the totality. From then on, one thinks, acts, and feels not on behalf of the egocentric individual, which one previously thought one was, but on behalf of the self-creative whole. If one is averse to the term "God," or thinks the term is inappropriate, one can call it any other name denoting a self-creative universe. In the recently published Gospel of Judas, the author of that Gospel calls God "The Great Self-Generative Spirit" who created the universe by and out of itself.

In the scientific view of the universe, energy is an eternal singularity. If this singularity also possesses the power to transcend itself and transform into another state or form (and there is some recent scientific evidence for such a force), then we have self-creative energy as the basic cosmic substance, and this self-creative energy continuously evolves itself toward ever higher levels of awareness. In us, Homo sapiens sapiens, energy has finally become aware of itself as the creative substance and the creative power of the universe. And we humans, who are aware of this, can be active co-creators or "co-evolvers" in the creative process of cosmic self-evolution.

My universe is the same as the universe of science. Only that, to me, the universe of science is self-creative and thus "spiritual" or "divine."

Of course, one can regard the universe as mundane, a chance outcome of chaotic energy. But I feel and think (and "feel" is the operative word here) that the universe is self-creative and divine.

Top
#48954 - 06/30/13 01:53 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Turner]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
While you're waving a flag to get attention, you may draw a look or two. However when you get close and examine the flag, and the flag waver only to find there is nothing of any real interest, you walk on.

Six million hits, 5,999,258 passing by.

With the flag waver posting 65% of the posts and 758 people responding out of the six million passers by, the facts and figures paint a dismal picture regarding the lack of interest in the flag and the waver. Also with the flag waver making regular visits to claim his fame and glory for the thread, you could probably guess who's responsible for the majority of the hits as he comes back to feed his narcissism, rereading his conversations as he dialogues with himself, fabricating an image to suit his own fancy.

Truly Rev. it is hard to be humble. Probably why you call yourself Reverend... If someone should show some reverence, to feed your need for attention, it might as well be you.

Regarding Aminius: No doubt from reading his posts on the Canadian Church website he seems interested in promoting a dialogue that is not centered around himself. Good for him. Such is a respectable way to dialogue that will draw interest and participation.
Though you previously made the comment that you were interested in drawing the attention to yourself, perhaps his example might show that spirituality is not centered in individuality that is wrapped around a singular personality.
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#48956 - 06/30/13 06:58 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Mike Kremer Offline

Megastar

Registered: 10/16/04
Posts: 1696
Loc: London UK
I have used the following site to see who accesses SAGG.

I dont find any Religious societies or Churches, prehaps I have been looking in the wrong areas?

Seems like a majority of retired men, and certain same people have accessed this particular Philosophy of Religions, hundreds of times

http://www.scienceagogo.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=32993
_________________________
.

.
"You will never find a real Human being - Even in a mirror." ....Mike Kremer.



Top
#48958 - 07/01/13 01:21 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Mike Kremer]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Originally Posted By: Mike Kremer

Seems like a majority of retired men, and certain same people have accessed this particular Philosophy of Religions, hundreds of times
Or thousands of times...?
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#48960 - 07/01/13 03:25 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: ]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Originally Posted By: Arminius


No, TT, the dialogue is not contrived. On the "Religion and Faith" forum of www.wondercafe.ca one can insert any specific block of text to which one wants to reply, and then reply.
Being that he intimated the block of text that he took from a conversation you had with another person was between the two of you, it was contrived.
Originally Posted By: Arminius

But I am not as "truly humble" as Revlgking suggests. Quite the opposite, I am truly conceited. After all, being one with God is the highest possible conceit.

I've found that to be true with many who make that claim. The conceit that insists others recognize the glory in the one making the claim to fame, seems to always ignore the oneness of the universe to shine a light on the individual who wants the attention. The ONE universe always comes second...
Quote:

However, it is also the deepest possible humility--but only if one believes God to be the self-creative totality of being!

Belief in the personal experience or in intellectual precepts creates differences in both opinion and claim to fame.
Originally Posted By: Arminius

If one believes God to be the self-creative totality of being, then the sense of oneself as a separate ego-individual disappears, and one becomes one with the totality. From then on, one thinks, acts, and feels not on behalf of the egocentric individual, which one previously thought one was, but on behalf of the self-creative whole.

One can believe anything, and yet with the many beliefs a man carries, what often comes forward in action and in personality, is the unconscious programs of many beliefs and belief systems. Stability in Unity is superior to belief. Then one does not have to toot his own horn to convince himself and others it is so.
Originally Posted By: Arminius
If one is averse to the term "God," or thinks the term is inappropriate, one can call it any other name denoting a self-creative universe. In the recently published Gospel of Judas, the author of that Gospel calls God "The Great Self-Generative Spirit" who created the universe by and out of itself.

One could say anything they want. In respect to spirit and energy, perception of reality thru the ego is often subjective. As one evolves one finds creativity is not something that emerges but instead is. The Universe as creator and created is less likely to be making statements to being conceited, because it in the sense of being all that is doesn't explain itself or define itself in principal. Only Ego needs to explain itself in reference to defining ones self as something, like being one with God. So as long as it serves your purpose you will make your claims to being what you want others to see. (based on the need of the universe to have you do so as you see fit wink )
Originally Posted By: Arminius

In the scientific view of the universe, energy is an eternal singularity. If this singularity also possesses the power to transcend itself and transform into another state or form (and there is some recent scientific evidence for such a force), then we have self-creative energy as the basic cosmic substance, and this self-creative energy continuously evolves itself toward ever higher levels of awareness.
If it in itself is all that is, it does not evolve. However there are conscious units within the matrix of the awareness of self and reality which operate within fabricated timelines, living within a storyline of evolution. However, all that is doesn't find itself becoming more (that would make the infinite God not so infinite or Supreme), instead it simply displays the potential of all that is in difference to those who stand outside of all that is, (in their humility and conceit) while throwing out concepts of God and unity.
Originally Posted By: Arminius
In us, Homo sapiens sapiens, energy has finally become aware of itself as the creative substance and the creative power of the universe. And we humans, who are aware of this, can be active co-creators or "co-evolvers" in the creative process of cosmic self-evolution.

Not really. Your life as you experience it began in planning before you were born. You can surrender yourself to what already is, and has been put into motion, as you become self aware. Get to know your all that isness (so to speak) and join the game already in play. (One of the reasons Jesus [as humanity knows the personality] didn't try to change the conditions of his death by altering his predestined path as it was displayed in the human psyche. Events are cast into activity at levels far beyond the surface level of the mind. If you are conscious enough to become one with God (so to speak) you will find yourself joining yourself in activity at the level of God, rather than becoming something like God as a separate or co-creator.
Originally Posted By: Arminius

My universe is the same as the universe of science. Only that, to me, the universe of science is self-creative and thus "spiritual" or "divine."

Good luck on getting a scientist to add "spiritual" and "divine" to his or her scientific principals. Not saying it won't happen, but to make sweeping statements to you and science being on the same page is amusing at best.
Originally Posted By: Arminius

Of course, one can regard the universe as mundane, a chance outcome of chaotic energy. But I feel and think (and "feel" is the operative word here) that the universe is self-creative and divine.

I had a feeling once..

I might have to amend my previous statements regarding the usefulness of any dialogue you might have regarding the Reverends interest. It seems you both are truly interested in making the conversation about who and what you are.

Must be the conceit/humility thing you mentioned. whistle
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#48961 - 07/01/13 04:02 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
A dialogue between you (the Turtle), and me (the Rev). Here we go:
Originally Posted By: Tutor Turtle
While you're waving a flag to get attention..."
LGK: Correction. I do not wave flags. I write things that many I think of as REVS--that is, people out there who I respect--seem to enjoy reading.

I write for and revere all readers. But I especially revere readers who are also writers and who have some meaningful things to say. Here and elsewhere, I have suggested: We all need to live lives worthy of being respected--revered.

Sad to say, TT, other than the ad hominems, I have no idea what you mean when you write:
Originally Posted By: Tutor Turtle
... you may draw a look or two. However when you get close and examine the flag, and the flag waver only to find there is nothing of any real interest, you walk on.
How come you refuse to "walk on"? Instead, you continue:
Originally Posted By: Tutor Turtle
Six million hits, 5,999,258 passing by.

With the flag waver posting 65% of the posts and 758 people responding out of the six million passers by, the facts and figures paint a dismal picture regarding the lack of interest in the flag and the waver.

Also with the flag waver making regular visits to claim his fame and glory for the thread, you could probably guess who's responsible for the majority of the hits as he comes back to feed his narcissism, rereading his conversations as he dialogues with himself, fabricating an image to suit his own fancy.

Truly Rev. it is hard to be humble. Probably why you call yourself Reverend ... If someone should show some reverence, to feed your need for attention, it might as well be you.

Regarding Aminius (TT, you mean, Arminius?): No doubt from reading his posts on the Canadian Church website he seems interested in promoting a dialogue that is not centered around himself. Good for him.

Such is a respectable way to dialogue that will draw interest and participation.

Though you previously made the comment that you were interested in drawing the attention to yourself, perhaps his example might show that spirituality is not centered in individuality that is wrapped around a singular personality.
I am happy to respect all who--if they so choose-- read without comment. However, indubitably, at www.wondercafe.ca --and all interested in posting are welcome to post--when the revered ones add their own measure of helpful and positive content without the personal (ad hominem) attacks, this feeling of respect increases, greatly.

BTW, other than writing jokingly about it, when did I ever write that I, personally, am a self-interested individualist?
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#48963 - 07/01/13 06:06 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Revlgking]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
A dialogue between you (the Turtle), and me (the Rev). Here we go:
Originally Posted By: Tutor Turtle
While you're waving a flag to get attention..."
LGK: Correction. I do not wave flags. I write things that many I think of as REVS--that is, people out there who I respect--seem to enjoy reading.

Of course you have your opinion. Whether anyone agrees with you or your points of view is always subjective.


Originally Posted By: Revlgking

I write for and revere all readers. But I especially revere readers who are also writers and who have some meaningful things to say. Here and elsewhere, I have suggested: We all need to live lives worthy of being respected--revered.

And in light of that thought, you did call me a psychopath, threw out the frequent Ad hominem, and like a child who wants attention, tried to rally others here to your side when ranting in favor of your opinion over those you felt didn't deserve any respect.

Your actions speak louder than your claims to being self righteous.



Originally Posted By: Revlgking

Sad to say, TT, I have no idea what you mean when you write:
Originally Posted By: Tutor Turtle
... you may draw a look or two. However when you get close and examine the flag, and the flag waver only to find there is nothing of any real interest, you walk on.

Understanding the general lack of interest in your narcissism does seem to escape you.


Originally Posted By: Revlgking
How come you refuse to "walk on"?

1.)I have an interest in addressing your narcissism, since it supersedes the philosophy of religion. 2.) I also have an in interest to bring the attention back to the Thread Topic, which by the way might actually be the reason this thread gets any hits at all.
Obviously when so many bypass the conversation after finding it has little to do with the thread topic and more about Rev. L.G.King and his world of beliefs and opinions, someone might question why out of 6 million hits there are only about 75 people who participate and less than 800 responses.

If the thread content was to dive more into philosophy rather than the repetitive content of your personal opinions, your personal biography, family vacations and the need for constant attention, it might get more people involved.

Maybe...

from post #44132
Originally Posted By: Bill S.
Could be that Rev is secretly working on another record attempt - to see how many different topics can be included in a single thread.



Originally Posted By: Revlgking

BTW, other than writing jokingly about it, when did I ever write that I, personally, am a self-interested individualist?
The idea that your interest is in drawing attention to yourself rather than the Thread Topic has already been addressed.
You must be having a senior moment...
#43130
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
Originally Posted By: Ellis
... and you, Rev, are very good at it [Getting the attention of readers]. However, it can become annoying.
Thanks, Ellis ... But, if it helps get attention... what's wrong with giving an idea the " kiss-of-life", as you call it? Isn't getting attention, among other things, what spurs writers to keep on writing?
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#49008 - 07/05/13 03:37 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Turner]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Ellis, as I recall, you are an an atheist and you live in Australia. If so, may I ask about the following:

The CBC news, recently reported the following about the rate of suicides, in Australia. I wonder to what extent our PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION plays a role.

What do you think?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_in_Australia

Suicide in Australia
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopaedia

Suicide in Australia has been extensively studied.

Approximately 2000 Australians die from suicide every year. Men are 4 times more likely to die by suicide than women and they use more violent means generally to end their lives.

Over the past decade, about 2100 people have died by suicide each year. There were 2132 deaths from suicide registered in 2009, which is down from the 2282 deaths from suicide recorded in 2008.

Note that both 2008 and 2009 figures are subject to revision. Deaths from suicide represented 1.4% of all deaths registered in 2009.

Suicide rates for both males and females have generally decreased since the mid-90s with the overall suicide rate decreasing by 23% between 1999 and 2009. Suicide rates for males peaked in 1997 at 23.6 per 100,000 but have steadily decreased since then and stood at 14.9 per 100 000 in 2009.

Female rates reached a high of 6.2 per 100 000 in 1997. Rates declined after that and was 4.5 per 100 000 in 2009.

In Australia 48% of all suicides in 2000 were by 35-64 year old; an additional 13% were by 65 year old and over.

The suicide rates for children younger than 15 years is estimated to have increased by 92% between the 1960s to 1990s.

Suicide rates are generally higher amongst males, rural and regional dwellers, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
=======================================
By the way, thanks for the amusing phrase you created, "brain-numbing posts." cool eh! Interesting!

_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
Page 106 of 120 < 1 2 ... 104 105 106 107 108 ... 119 120 >



Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor
Facebook

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.