Pointless argumentative thread alert

[shereads]

Blessed are the peacemakers.











Goodnight, pornsters.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Originally posted by Lisa Denton
Ooops, did you think I apologized? No, I said I came across a little stronger than I intended but that I stand by it.

I took admission of being stronger than intended and "putting foot in mouth" as an informal apology, not for your post but for your tone. If I'm incorrect, I'm sorry... but that's what I sort of thought.

You think I was harsh or rude? I don't.

At times, yes. The remark about "attack it sentence by sentence as being niether logical nor rational, while you attempt to defend a ludicrous remark" I found rude. Not for the point, mind you, but for the form it took. You could have made the same point without calling the remark "ludicrous".

I have treated you fairly in the end, middle and beginning. I treat everyone as well as I can. I take no responsibility for being rude. I wasn't rude.

Alright. I'm sorry I took it wrongly, then.

You often come across as being rude, patronizing and a legend in your own mind. You take no responsibility for it. You think it goes over everyone's head.

I haven't been, near as I can tell, any more rude than you've been Lisa, and if you've not been rude--as you've said--then neither of us have. I haven't berated anyone, I haven't called anyone's opinion lame or silly... I've only been direct and polite, but disagreeing with them, and doing so as clearly as I can so there's no question what I mean by my retort. I take responsibility for everything I say, its just hard to defend things sometimes when what I'm saying isn't being targetted--and I, personally, am.

I will say, though, it is entirely possible that I've been rude and such. I welcome people to point out where and why, as I am not here to offend anyone and if its so obvious that I have... surely someone can give me an example and afford me the opportunity to say that I'm sorry.

I am not trying to be mean, just honest. I think you can make more sense to people and have more meaningful dialogue if you treat them as equals.

P.S. If you call me chica I will come through that screen.

I treat everyone as equals. I haven't treated or thought less of anyone for their beliefs, sex, creed, or preference... I treat everyone to the same standards--if you're going to make a point about something, be prepared to defend it; an unanalyzed belief is the definition of "close minded".

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Originally posted by doormouse
You think I"m being offensive??


LOL

You don't know me yet.

You insult or accuse my friends, you hear my roar.

Back in your court. And don't, I know it's hard, blame anyone for your words.

You told me to eat shit, doormouse. That is an offense by definition. Am I wrong about that?

Where have I insulted or accused your friends?

See, this is the hard part... you accuse me of things, I simply ask for examples. Please, by all means, enlighten me.

 

[Lisa Denton]

Joe was offended???

LMFAO!!!! Well eat shit and taste your own medicine!!

What about your comments you've so freely lashed out on others???? They're supposed to just swallow it and move on???

How was she harsh? How the hell was she any more harsh than you have been, minus your glorified text... she spoke her mind.

Don't turn this on Lisa. She commented. Stiff fucking shit!!!

Aren't others allowed an opinion when mr. Joe has something to say????

I just pass over your comments. That's how much your dribble means to me. But don't you DARE mention Lisa. She's one of MANY who have had the guts to comment in fear of the retaliation of your snot nosed college ways.

Go ahead 'Joe'. I"m in for the night. You want to fault my friends posts? I'm here to fight.

Give it your best shot.

Time Out!!! Time Out!!!!

You guys lost me way back there. I was trying to eat and you all was postin away.
Thanks doormouse and LDW, for defending me and sorry you got dragged into a streetfight.
This got too personal and too offensive while I was busy eatin a freakin sammich, I was incapacitated by hunger and the aroma of onions.
Its just a thread. And no reasons as yet, to get too worked up. Well maybe, I have no idea what you guys is sayin up there.
I haven't insulted him yet, or not really.
Lets just calm down and lemme try to read what you guys was saying.

 

[Lisa Denton]

Ok, stand by!!!!!

 

[Lisa Denton]

Listen up, this hasn't gotten out of hand yet.
I don't think, I couldn't read em all.
Joe, if you made some remark to LDW about being dickish, well that wasn't right.
Doormouse, did you really tell him to eat shit? Well that wasn't very nice either.
Anywho we was having a discussion and I, for one, am not going to let it get to me.
Joe, that other thread where I apologized to you, I said some things that I shouldn't have and admitted it and told you I was sorry.
On this thread you lost your temper and I didn't. Other people coming in may have been defending me, and attacking you, but that was not me. I said some things which were not nice, not rude, just not nice.
Now I suggest we all either walk away or change tone or something before everything does get rude.
I don't want to make anybody upset or angry.

 

[matriarch]

Listen up, this hasn't gotten out of hand yet.
I don't think, I couldn't read em all.
Joe, if you made some remark to LDW about being dickish, well that wasn't right.
Doormouse, did you really tell him to eat shit? Well that wasn't very nice either.
Anywho we was having a discussion and I, for one, am not going to let it get to me.
Joe, that other thread where I apologized to you, I said some things that I shouldn't have and admitted it and told you I was sorry.
On this thread you lost your temper and I didn't. Other people coming in may have been defending me, and attacking you, but that was not me. I said some things which were not nice, not rude, just not nice.
Now I suggest we all either walk away or change tone or something before everything does get rude.
I don't want to make anybody upset or angry.

Bless you Lisa, for taking on the role of peacemaker. Some of us will appreciate it, others will not.

I already walked away. I have better things to do with my time than endure lectures.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Originally posted by Lisa Denton
Listen up, this hasn't gotten out of hand yet.
I don't think, I couldn't read em all.
Joe, if you made some remark to LDW about being dickish, well that wasn't right.
Doormouse, did you really tell him to eat shit? Well that wasn't very nice either.
Anywho we was having a discussion and I, for one, am not going to let it get to me.
Joe, that other thread where I apologized to you, I said some things that I shouldn't have and admitted it and told you I was sorry.
On this thread you lost your temper and I didn't. Other people coming in may have been defending me, and attacking you, but that was not me. I said some things which were not nice, not rude, just not nice.
Now I suggest we all either walk away or change tone or something before everything does get rude.
I don't want to make anybody upset or angry.

He laughed at a post I made and I asked him why he did, and asked if he was being sarcastic--then said that if he was, that would be dickish. I didn't call him anything.

I don't see where I've lost my temper... I rather have been calm. My post that was third-person is the only post I've made that hasn't been "to form", but that was more lighthearted than anything else.

However, beyond all of that... I keep getting told "you're wrong and rude and mean", but I have yet to have anyone (and I do mean anyone) show me this when asked politely to do so. I reserve the right to apologize for anything I've done that has been out of line, but I cannot do that blindly.

 

[doormouse]

Alright. I'm sorry I took it wrongly, then.



I haven't been, near as I can tell, any more rude than you've been Lisa, and if you've not been rude--as you've said--then neither of us have.



.

She wasn't fucking rude!!!!

So she expressed herself... why use her as your constant example??

Why not use me????

Leave her alone.

 

[doormouse]

Listen up, this hasn't gotten out of hand yet.
I don't think, I couldn't read em all.
Joe, if you made some remark to LDW about being dickish, well that wasn't right.
Doormouse, did you really tell him to eat shit? Well that wasn't very nice either.
Anywho we was having a discussion and I, for one, am not going to let it get to me.
Joe, that other thread where I apologized to you, I said some things that I shouldn't have and admitted it and told you I was sorry.
On this thread you lost your temper and I didn't. Other people coming in may have been defending me, and attacking you, but that was not me. I said some things which were not nice, not rude, just not nice.
Now I suggest we all either walk away or change tone or something before everything does get rude.
I don't want to make anybody upset or angry.

Yeah, I really did tell him to taste his own medicine.

When he buries his sorry ass and admits he's offended, then so shall I.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Originally posted by doormouse
She wasn't fucking rude!!!!

So she expressed herself... why use her as your constant example??

Why not use me????

Leave her alone.

Good Lord, please relax. I felt that her descriptor of the remark that I would have given of "ludicrous" dismissedd my point prior to it even being made on the grounds of it being silly. As such, I took it as possibly rude--namely, dismissing someone's opinion as "silly" without debating the actual merits or flaws of the position.

I have no problems with her asserting herself. As a matter of fact, doormouse, if you look at the thread--or any thread we've argued in, her and I--you'll find that I am highly encouraging of expression... I ask questions and hope for answers.

I am not picking on her. I haven't done so yet. My statement that you quote says that I do not see how I have been any more rude than she has... and also that if I have, please tell me where. I didn't berate her, I didn't belittle her. I said what I thought--I expressed myself, as you put it--and asked for correction if I were wrong.

Why are you so angry/aggressive?

 

[Lisa Denton]

He laughed at a post I made and I asked him why he did, and asked if he was being sarcastic--then said that if he was, that would be dickish. I didn't call him anything.

I don't see where I've lost my temper... I rather have been calm. My post that was third-person is the only post I've made that hasn't been "to form", but that was more lighthearted than anything else.

However, beyond all of that... I keep getting told "you're wrong and rude and mean", but I have yet to have anyone (and I do mean anyone) show me this when asked politely to do so. I reserve the right to apologize for anything I've done that has been out of line, but I cannot do that blindly.

Like I say, I didn't read them all. It was just a little more than I could keep up with. I saw one post where you said maybe you were wrong. I'm happy for you. Join in.
I am not going to go back and review and look at everything, its not important to me. What I said about the way you sometimes come across was self explanatory and could be taken as advice.
If you want to continue this at another time I will be glad to, its late and I hurt my back and have to go lay down. Bye.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Originally posted by Lisa Denton
Like I say, I didn't read them all. It was just a little more than I could keep up with. I saw one post where you said maybe you were wrong. I'm happy for you. Join in.
I am not going to go back and review and look at everything, its not important to me. What I said about the way you sometimes come across was self explanatory and could be taken as advice.
If you want to continue this at another time I will be glad to, its late and I hurt my back and have to go lay down. Bye.

Well, its explanatory, but as it didn't include any examples... I don't think I'd say it was self-explanatory. Its a conclusion without premise, and an explanation of how would be appreciated in the future, when you feel better.

 

[minsue]

What the hell happened here???

Sheesh! Start a pointless argumentative thread and people start arguing on it!?! WTF?




Everybody back to your corners


A few brief replies:

Lisa, depression and bi-polar disorder are cruel diseases and, in my experience, those of us that suffer from them often become cruel ourselves. It's a defense mechanism. Forgive yourself. It's not your fault. Keep repeating that. It's not your fault.

Joe, you keep referring to opinions that are "not correct." Opinions are subjective. By definition, an opinion cannot be incorrect.

Doormouse, Mother Goose?!?!?

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Re: What the hell happened here???

Originally posted by minsue
Sheesh! Start a pointless argumentative thread and people start arguing on it!?! WTF?




Everybody back to your corners


A few brief replies:

Lisa, depression and bi-polar disorder are cruel diseases and, in my experience, those of us that suffer from them often become cruel ourselves. It's a defense mechanism. Forgive yourself. It's not your fault. Keep repeating that. It's not your fault.

Joe, you keep referring to opinions that are "not correct." Opinions are subjective. By definition, an opinion cannot be incorrect.

Doormouse, Mother Goose?!?!?

(from www.m-w.com)

Main Entry: opin·ion
Pronunciation: &-'pin-y&n
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin opinion-, opinio, from opinari
1 a : a view, judgment, or appraisal formed in the mind about a particular matter

As a view or judgement or appraisal can be inaccurate... so can an opinion. For instance, "Its my opinion that you're a man" doesn't mean that you are, in fact, a man.

That opinions relate to the subject (subjective) doesn't mean that they're not up for analysis. They are judgements that are as open to critique as any other proposition, and certainly when they're put forth as evidence or conclusions to a point.

 

[minsue]

Re: Re: What the hell happened here???

(from www.m-w.com)

Main Entry: opin·ion
Pronunciation: &-'pin-y&n
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin opinion-, opinio, from opinari
1 a : a view, judgment, or appraisal formed in the mind about a particular matter

As a view or judgement or appraisal can be inaccurate... so can an opinion. For instance, "Its my opinion that you're a man" doesn't mean that you are, in fact, a man.

That opinions relate to the subject (subjective) doesn't mean that they're not up for analysis. They are judgements that are as open to critique as any other proposition, and certainly when they're put forth as evidence or conclusions to a point.

Fair enough. I hadn't realized that your references to opinions were about incorrect statements regarding issues that can be proven as fact. I generally wouldn't refer to such statements as opinions which would be what led to my confusion.

Let me try this again...opinions on topics that cannot be proven as fact (the apparently common opinion that your posts are rude being one example, the existence of god & the value of religion being others) are subjective and, as such, cannot be classified as correct or incorrect.

I never said opinions could not be debated or analyzed, Joe. I don't agree with that at all, obviously, seeing as how I started this thread in the first place.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Re: Re: Re: What the hell happened here???

Originally posted by minsue
Fair enough. I hadn't realized that your references to opinions were about incorrect statements regarding issues that can be proven as fact. I generally wouldn't refer to such statements as opinions which would be what led to my confusion.

Let me try this again...opinions on topics that cannot be proven as fact (the apparently common opinion that your posts are rude being one example, the existence of god & the value of religion being others) are subjective and, as such, cannot be classified as correct or incorrect.

I never said opinions could not be debated or analyzed, Joe. I don't agree with that at all, obviously, seeing as how I started this thread in the first place.

I would say that the existence of God and the value of religion are analyzable and can be correct and incorrect--that's entirely possible. For instance, if it is true that there is no God... then opinions as to God not existing would be correct.

Similarly, if someone is to say "It's my opinion that Christians are all evil people that only harm, enslave, and hurt people"... there are rational ways to show that to be an incorrect opinion (namely, by showing just one instance where that wasn't so).

 

[shereads]

Re: Re: What the hell happened here???

Joe - for the sake of argument

How can a view or a judgement be inaccurate?

Aren't both subjective? An example:

"In my judgement," said Earline, "the Grand Canyon is a ditch. The view from the car is disappointing."

We might disagree with Earline's description of the canyon. We might think she should have walked to the edge of the parking lot to get a better view. But is her assessment/opinion of the canyon inaccurate?

I can see how an appraisal might be inaccurate or even wildly inaccurate ("I estimate the market value of the Grand Canyon at $120,000, including the licensed concessions.") But on the other hand, an appraisal isn't a statement of fact but of opinion. You might appraise George Clooney's appearance and disagree with my appraisal. But that doesn't mean you're wrong...right?

----------

(from www.m-w.com)

Main Entry: opin·ion
Pronunciation: &-'pin-y&n
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin opinion-, opinio, from opinari
1 a : a view, judgment, or appraisal formed in the mind about a particular matter

As a view or judgement or appraisal can be inaccurate... so can an opinion. For instance, "Its my opinion that you're a man" doesn't mean that you are, in fact, a man.

That opinions relate to the subject (subjective) doesn't mean that they're not up for analysis. They are judgements that are as open to critique as any other proposition, and certainly when they're put forth as evidence or conclusions to a point.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Re: Re: Re: What the hell happened here???

Originally posted by shereads
Joe - for the sake of argument

How can a view or a judgement be inaccurate?

Aren't both subjective? An example:

"In my judgement," said Earline, "the Grand Canyon is a ditch. The view from the car is disappointing."

We might disagree with Earline's description of the canyon. We might think she should have walked to the edge of the parking lot to get a better view. But is her assessment/opinion of the canyon inaccurate?

I can see how an appraisal might be inaccurate or even wildly inaccurate ("I estimate the market value of the Grand Canyon at $120,000, including the licensed concessions.") But on the other hand, an appraisal isn't a statement of fact but of opinion. You might appraise George Clooney's appearance and disagree with my appraisal. But that doesn't mean you're wrong...right?

----------

Well, honestly, it comes with the acceptance of an objective reality... which most people believe in to some extent.

If I were to have an opinion about "you only ever harm people and kill them and lie to them"... can that be wrong? Well, that its my opinion means that its related to the subject (subjetivism). I'm the subject. But its a value judgement on the world (you are part of the world), so it is relative to the object as well (objectivism).

As it relates to the object, it is possibly estimatable... that estimate could be wrong.

That's the short-hand way of explaining.

 

[shereads]

Re: Re: Re: Re: What the hell happened here???

I would say that the existence of God and the value of religion are analyzable and can be correct and incorrect--that's entirely possible. For instance, if it is true that there is no God... then opinions as to God not existing would be correct.

BZZZ. Wrong, thank you for playing...Using known methods of analysis, it's impossible to prove or disprove the existence of God. Einstein said yes, Stephen Hawking says no. It's possible that Einstein now has proof, but no way to give Stephen Hawking the news, so we're back where we were.

On a scale of 0 to 10, 0 being Proof of God's Non-Existence and 10 being Proof of God's Existence, neither you nor Amicus can assign a score to the validity of religion and defend its accuracy without using subjective data.

Those of us who fear religious extemism can't prove that we're in danger of having religion forced on us. But we have enough evidence to justify our fears: the teaching of Creationism in our schools, for one thing. An issue that most American had thought was laid to rest has reemerged in a number of communities where its proponents were able to use government to exert their will. That's not an indictment of every person of faith, but it's a reason to fear evangelical Christians in positions of ultimate power.

The travel writer for the Miami Herald reviewed a luxury cruise to the Galapagos Islands a few weeks ago. Tucked into the closing paragraphs was this disturbing little tidbit: the ship's naturalist didn't mention Darwin during his lectures. When she asked him why, he said the cruise line had told him to avoid mentioning evolution, in response to complaints from Christian passengers. I felt ripped off and I wasn't even on the cruise. Even most Christians don't insist on a literal interpretation of Genesis, and I think they ought to be offended that a fringe minority is making inroads like this on the way the rest of us live.



The religious right will argue that Darwin's theory can't be proven, so it shouldn't be discussed in settings where it might offend Christians. I'd argue that Creationism is science twisted to support a fairy tale, and that teaching it in public schools denies parents the right to help their children distinguish between scientific theory and mythology. But only one side of this argument could point to the eohippus display at the Museum of Natural History in NY, and say, "There's my evidence."

Fundamentalist Christians are forcing illogic on the rest of us, not the other way around.

 

[The Mutt]

I think it started way back with Point/Counterpoint on 60 Minutes; this absurd notion that there are two sides to every issue and that they are worthy of equal consideration.
If someone came up to you and said that the earth was made of marmalade and that smoking cigarettes makes your penis grow and that all women are actually space aliens in disguise, what would you tell them? "I respect your opinion and you have a right to it." Or would you say, "I strongly suggest you seek medical attention"?
Some ideas are wrong. Some opinions are just plain silly. There is a thing called the real world. I chose to live in it.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What the hell happened here???

Originally posted by shereads
BZZZ. Wrong, thank you for playing...Using known methods of analysis, it's impossible to prove or disprove the existence of God. Einstein said yes, Stephen Hawking says no. It's possible that Einstein now has proof, but no way to give Stephen Hawking the news, so we're back where we were.

On a scale of 0 to 10, 0 being Proof of God's Non-Existence and 10 being Proof of God's Existence, neither you nor Amicus can assign a score and defend its accuracy without using subjective data.

Those of us who fear religious extemism can't prove that we're in danger of having religion forced on us. But we have enough evidence to justify our fears: the teaching of Creationism in our schools, for one thing. An issue that most American had thought was laid to rest has reemerged in a number of communities where its proponents were able to use government to exert their will. That's not an indictment of every person of faith, but it's a reason to fear evangelical Christians in positions of ultimate power.

The travel writer for the Miami Herald reviewed a luxury cruise to the Galapagos Islands a few weeks ago. Tucked into the closing paragraphs was this disturbing little tidbit: the ship's naturalist didn't mention Darwin during his lectures. When she asked him why, he said the cruise line had told him to avoid mentioning evolution, in response to passenger complaints. I felt ripped off and I wasn't even on the cruise.



The religious right will argue that Darwin's theory can't be proven, so it shouldn't be discussed in settings where it might offend Christians. I'd argue that Creationism is science twisted to support a fairy tale, and that teaching it in public schools denies parents the right to help their children distinguish between science and mythology. But only one side of this argument could point to the eohippus display at the Museum of Natural History in NY, and say, "There's my evidence."

Bzzz... I'm still right. The issue was "how can an opinion be correct"... IF someone has the opinion that God does not exist... AND it is true that God does not exist... THEN that opinion is correct.

Saying "buy you can't prove that God exists" does not invalidate the argument. Beyond that, it may be possible to prove God exists or does not exist (because it is not impossible by definition), nothing about the definition of "God" necessitates "unknowable" or "unprovable". For instance, what if God came down and made Himself known?

It is logically possible.

 

[shereads]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What the hell happened here???

Bzzz... I'm still right. The issue was "how can an opinion be correct"...

The issue was this statement: "I would say that the existence of God and the value of religion are analyzable and can be correct and incorrect." You can support the second half of that statement only with a "what if," which makes as much sense as arriving at reasonable doubt in a criminal trial by saying, "What if we convict O.J. and years later, space aliens reveal that they killed Nicole."

Edited to add: "the existence of God" and "the value of religion" are entirely separate issues. God's existence isn't necessary for religion to have value for some of its practitioners.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What the hell happened here???

Originally posted by shereads
Using known methods of analysis, it's impossible to prove or disprove the existence of God.

It is possible that logic can disprove the existence of God (or even prove it), strictly speaking because it is not impossible by definition for it to do so. That is hasn't surely is an issue, but to say something is impossible is incredibly bold.

For instance, I wouldn't hold my breath until its proven, but I can't truly say it not provable.

 

[shereads]

Re: Re: Re: Re: What the hell happened here???

Well, honestly, it comes with the acceptance of an objective reality... which most people believe in to some extent.

If I were to have an opinion about "you only ever harm people and kill them and lie to them"... can that be wrong? Well, that its my opinion means that its related to the subject (subjetivism). I'm the subject. But its a value judgement on the world (you are part of the world), so it is relative to the object as well (objectivism).

As it relates to the object, it is possibly estimatable... that estimate could be wrong.

That's the short-hand way of explaining.

"You only ever harm people and kill them" is not based on a view, a judgment, or an appraisal. That's the statement I'm referring to. I never said people can't pull opinions out of thin air.

If you're referring not to me, but to a person or entity who appears to have harmed and killed/to be harming and killing people, you are forming an opinion based on a view, a judgement, an appraisal that may be right or wrong. Absent a context, it's a bogus illustration of a point.

In the context of the thread, and your entirely undertandable objection to the implication that religion is entirely bad, the opinion could easily be disproven by providing evidence that religion also does other things besides harming and killing people. You've already done that by citing charitable organizations with a religious base.