|
57-71
Stranger


Registered: 10/03/09
Posts: 289
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 10 years, 2 months
|
Re: Why didn't he pray for his son? [Re: Icelander] 1
#18890567 - 09/25/13 06:10 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said: More personalisms. That seems to be your best debate tactic. 
OK Icelander, let's discuss the "personalisms".
Here is the way I see what you have described as personalisms, and the hypocrisy involved with that description.
As a poster such as the OP, I can essentially attack any one whose view point I disagree with, in a personal manner, as long as they don't post here and defend themselves. This is the heart of the issue I have here.
This, in essence, is exactly what happened. The OP attacked the Warren family during a time of family crisis and ridiculed their beliefs. By proxy, because they do not attend the site, I returned the favour to the OP, and pointed out this hypocrisy to him. Not because I have any consideration or affinity for the Warrens of any other group of believers no matter their philosophy, but because it is the right thing to do IMO.
Correct? Help me out here if you think I am off track, but I see this situation every day on this board and it surely strikes me as cowardly and hypocritical, especially considering this is supposed to be a forum that embraces all manner of philosophical discussion respectfully. Much of what is posted by certain rabid atheists does not pass this test.
|
Repertoire89
Cat



Registered: 11/15/12
Posts: 21,773
|
Re: Why didn't he pray for his son? [Re: 57-71]
#18890843 - 09/25/13 07:25 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
57-71 said:
OK Icelander, let's discuss the "personalisms".
Here is the way I see what you have described as personalisms, and the hypocrisy involved with that description.
As a poster such as the OP, I can essentially attack any one whose view point I disagree with, in a personal manner, as long as they don't post here and defend themselves. This is the heart of the issue I have here.
This, in essence, is exactly what happened. The OP attacked the Warren family during a time of family crisis and ridiculed their beliefs. By proxy, because they do not attend the site, I returned the favour to the OP, and pointed out this hypocrisy to him. Not because I have any consideration or affinity for the Warrens of any other group of believers no matter their philosophy, but because it is the right thing to do IMO.
Correct? Help me out here if you think I am off track, but I see this situation every day on this board and it surely strikes me as cowardly and hypocritical, especially considering this is supposed to be a forum that embraces all manner of philosophical discussion respectfully. Much of what is posted by certain rabid atheists does not pass this test.
A personalism refers to the person you are arguing with, instead of competing with their argument you attempt to demonize the individual.
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem
Quote:
Ad hominem attacks can take the form of overtly attacking somebody, or more subtly casting doubt on their character or personal attributes as a way to discredit their argument. The result of an ad hom attack can be to undermine someone's case without actually having to engage with it.
Example: After Sally presents an eloquent and compelling case for a more equitable taxation system, Sam asks the audience whether we should believe anything from a woman who isn't married, was once arrested, and smells a bit weird.
"Much of what is posted by certain rabid atheists does not pass this test" ~ 57-71

|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Why didn't he pray for his son? [Re: 57-71]
#18890877 - 09/25/13 07:35 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
It might behove you to study the forum guidelines on what a rule violating personalism actually is. As it is you don't seem to understand. It's amazing how many people come in to post believing that their ideas on what should be good to go here are the way the forum is set up. That's usually not the case.
From the post above.
A personalism refers to the person you are arguing with, instead of competing with their argument you attempt to demonize the individual.
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,432
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: Why didn't he pray for his son? [Re: 57-71]
#18890912 - 09/25/13 07:46 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Let's look at the facts:
1. Warren has made millions promoting the Bible as the inerrant Word of God.
2. Jesus said that whoever prays in faith will be healed.
3. Warren's son died from depression and suicide.
There are only a few possible conclusions:
1. The Warrens didn't pray (or with enough faith).
2. Their whole life is a lie.
Is a fact a personalism or not?
--------------------
|
57-71
Stranger


Registered: 10/03/09
Posts: 289
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 10 years, 2 months
|
|
Quote:
OrgoneConclusion said: Let's look at the facts:
1. Warren has made millions promoting the Bible as the inerrant Word of God.
2. Jesus said that whoever prays in faith will be healed.
3. Warren's son died from depression and suicide.
There are only a few possible conclusions:
1. The Warrens didn't pray (or with enough faith).
2. Their whole life is a lie.
Is a fact a personalism or not?
1. You are correct 2 Possibly it is a fact that Jesus said this, however much has been attributed to him. It is also believed by Christians that prayer is a route to healing, however there is no guarantee (as you imply there is) that healing will take place. Believers accede this to the will of god. 3.True
1.How you can claim to know this and purport it as fact, or even a possibility, is truly against all scientific reason. There may many ways to know this, or none. 2.This is sensationalism (paparazzi style)for the mindless minions; and is a judgement on your behalf that is not reasoned argument. It is certainly not fact, but simply an attack against their belief.
So now we are back at this:
"This, in essence, is exactly what happened. The OP attacked the Warren family during a time of family crisis and ridiculed their beliefs. By proxy, because they do not attend the site, I returned the favour to the OP, and pointed out this hypocrisy to him. Not because I have any consideration or affinity for the Warrens of any other group of believers no matter their philosophy, but because it is the right thing to do IMO.
Correct? Help me out here if you think I am off track, but I see this situation every day on this board and it surely strikes me as cowardly and hypocritical, especially considering this is supposed to be a forum that embraces all manner of philosophical discussion respectfully. Much of what is posted by certain rabid atheists does not pass this test."
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,432
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: Why didn't he pray for his son? [Re: 57-71]
#18891000 - 09/25/13 08:15 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
How does your choice of the word 'rabid' add to the discussion?
--------------------
|
57-71
Stranger


Registered: 10/03/09
Posts: 289
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 10 years, 2 months
|
|
Quote:
OrgoneConclusion said: How does your choice of the word 'rabid' add to the discussion?
I agree it doesn't really, but it is a fact!
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Why didn't he pray for his son? [Re: 57-71]
#18891227 - 09/25/13 09:15 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
It is not a "fact" except in your mind. I actually know what that word means.
Once again you want to ignore the forum guidelines in favor of your own morality. Why not create your own site with your own rules rather than complaining about how this forum works. If you see a real offense flag it and let a moderator handle it.
Or, leave and post elsewhere.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
57-71
Stranger


Registered: 10/03/09
Posts: 289
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 10 years, 2 months
|
Re: Why didn't he pray for his son? [Re: Icelander]
#18891342 - 09/25/13 09:39 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said: It is not a "fact" except in your mind. I actually know what that word means.
Once again you want to ignore the forum guidelines in favor of your own morality. Why not create your own site with your own rules rather than complaining about how this forum works. If you see a real offense flag it and let a moderator handle it.
Or, leave and post elsewhere.
As were the purported "facts" in the post I responded to, and which post was not refuted. Again, seemingly, if one supports a certain POV in this philosophy forum then one is accepted and safe. Again, my morality is your judgement and that is fair enough for you to exercise that. It cuts both ways though.
And, sir, for you or anyone else here to invite a (for lack of a better word) a dissident poster to leave and also elsewhere claim to be a proponent of free speech is entirely rich, and again hypocritical notwithstanding. Have I lied? No. Truth hurt? Seemingly so.
|
Repertoire89
Cat



Registered: 11/15/12
Posts: 21,773
|
Re: Why didn't he pray for his son? [Re: 57-71]
#18891498 - 09/25/13 10:09 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
57-71 said:
Quote:
OrgoneConclusion said: Let's look at the facts:
1. Warren has made millions promoting the Bible as the inerrant Word of God.
2. Jesus said that whoever prays in faith will be healed.
3. Warren's son died from depression and suicide.
There are only a few possible conclusions:
1. The Warrens didn't pray (or with enough faith).
2. Their whole life is a lie.
Is a fact a personalism or not?
1. You are correct 2 Possibly it is a fact that Jesus said this, however much has been attributed to him. It is also believed by Christians that prayer is a route to healing, however there is no guarantee (as you imply there is) that healing will take place. Believers accede this to the will of god. 3.True
1.How you can claim to know this and purport it as fact, or even a possibility, is truly against all scientific reason. There may many ways to know this, or none. 2.This is sensationalism (paparazzi style)for the mindless minions; and is a judgement on your behalf that is not reasoned argument. It is certainly not fact, but simply an attack against their belief.
Another ad-hominem underlined above
James 5:14-16 ESV
Is anyone among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer of faith will save the one who is sick, and the Lord will raise him up. And if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven. Therefore, confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous person has great power as it is working.
Quote:
So now we are back at this:
"This, in essence, is exactly what happened. The OP attacked the Warren family during a time of family crisis and ridiculed their beliefs. By proxy, because they do not attend the site, I returned the favour to the OP, and pointed out this hypocrisy to him. Not because I have any consideration or affinity for the Warrens of any other group of believers no matter their philosophy, but because it is the right thing to do IMO.
Correct? Help me out here if you think I am off track, but I see this situation every day on this board and it surely strikes me as cowardly and hypocritical, especially considering this is supposed to be a forum that embraces all manner of philosophical discussion respectfully. Much of what is posted by certain rabid atheists does not pass this test."
What does OP have to do with the topic? Don't answer that rhetorical question, this topic is not about OC.
|
Repertoire89
Cat



Registered: 11/15/12
Posts: 21,773
|
Re: Why didn't he pray for his son? [Re: 57-71]
#18891521 - 09/25/13 10:11 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
57-71 said:
And, sir, for you or anyone else here to invite a (for lack of a better word) a dissident poster to leave and also elsewhere claim to be a proponent of free speech is entirely rich, and again hypocritical notwithstanding. Have I lied? No. Truth hurt? Seemingly so.
The rules were explained to you, if you don't want to abide by them then
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Why didn't he pray for his son? [Re: 57-71]
#18892606 - 09/26/13 04:11 AM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
57-71 said:
Quote:
Icelander said: It is not a "fact" except in your mind. I actually know what that word means.
Once again you want to ignore the forum guidelines in favor of your own morality. Why not create your own site with your own rules rather than complaining about how this forum works. If you see a real offense flag it and let a moderator handle it.
Or, leave and post elsewhere.
As were the purported "facts" in the post I responded to, and which post was not refuted. Again, seemingly, if one supports a certain POV in this philosophy forum then one is accepted and safe. Again, my morality is your judgement and that is fair enough for you to exercise that. It cuts both ways though.
And, sir, for you or anyone else here to invite a (for lack of a better word) a dissident poster to leave and also elsewhere claim to be a proponent of free speech is entirely rich, and again hypocritical notwithstanding. Have I lied? No. Truth hurt? Seemingly so.
It's hardly hypocritical to give someone the option to leave if they are at odds with the forum rules. I never told you to leave but rather reminded you of that option. Again we play by the rules set up by the owners of this site. It's not our call. As long as we play by them then there is no problem unless self made. To complain about the rules when it's not your game is small minded imo. If you don't like the rules and how the game is played and this is a game for us here as far as I can tell, then it behoves you to find another.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
57-71
Stranger


Registered: 10/03/09
Posts: 289
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 10 years, 2 months
|
Re: Why didn't he pray for his son? [Re: Icelander]
#18895472 - 09/26/13 07:03 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Quote:
57-71 said:
Quote:
Icelander said: It is not a "fact" except in your mind. I actually know what that word means.
Once again you want to ignore the forum guidelines in favor of your own morality. Why not create your own site with your own rules rather than complaining about how this forum works. If you see a real offense flag it and let a moderator handle it.
Or, leave and post elsewhere.
As were the purported "facts" in the post I responded to, and which post was not refuted. Again, seemingly, if one supports a certain POV in this philosophy forum then one is accepted and safe. Again, my morality is your judgement and that is fair enough for you to exercise that. It cuts both ways though.
And, sir, for you or anyone else here to invite a (for lack of a better word) a dissident poster to leave and also elsewhere claim to be a proponent of free speech is entirely rich, and again hypocritical notwithstanding. Have I lied? No. Truth hurt? Seemingly so.
It's hardly hypocritical to give someone the option to leave if they are at odds with the forum rules. I never told you to leave but rather reminded you of that option. Again we play by the rules set up by the owners of this site. It's not our call. As long as we play by them then there is no problem unless self made. To complain about the rules when it's not your game is small minded imo. If you don't like the rules and how the game is played and this is a game for us here as far as I can tell, then it behoves you to find another.
I have bolded your words as reminder of what facts are. As for the rest of the post, how utterly pharisaic. Well done.
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,432
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: Why didn't he pray for his son? [Re: 57-71] 1
#18895703 - 09/26/13 08:06 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|

Did someone write pharaohsaic?
--------------------
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,432
Loc: Under the C
|
|

No, you silly, he wrote Farrahsaic!
--------------------
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,432
Loc: Under the C
|
|
Oh...
--------------------
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Why didn't he pray for his son? [Re: 57-71]
#18895887 - 09/26/13 08:36 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
57-71 said:
Quote:
Icelander said:
Quote:
57-71 said:
Quote:
Icelander said: It is not a "fact" except in your mind. I actually know what that word means.
Once again you want to ignore the forum guidelines in favor of your own morality. Why not create your own site with your own rules rather than complaining about how this forum works. If you see a real offense flag it and let a moderator handle it.
Or, leave and post elsewhere.
As were the purported "facts" in the post I responded to, and which post was not refuted. Again, seemingly, if one supports a certain POV in this philosophy forum then one is accepted and safe. Again, my morality is your judgement and that is fair enough for you to exercise that. It cuts both ways though.
And, sir, for you or anyone else here to invite a (for lack of a better word) a dissident poster to leave and also elsewhere claim to be a proponent of free speech is entirely rich, and again hypocritical notwithstanding. Have I lied? No. Truth hurt? Seemingly so.
It's hardly hypocritical to give someone the option to leave if they are at odds with the forum rules. I never told you to leave but rather reminded you of that option. Again we play by the rules set up by the owners of this site. It's not our call. As long as we play by them then there is no problem unless self made. To complain about the rules when it's not your game is small minded imo. If you don't like the rules and how the game is played and this is a game for us here as far as I can tell, then it behoves you to find another.
I have bolded your words as reminder of what facts are. As for the rest of the post, how utterly pharisaic. Well done.
Because I told you there are rules to this forum?
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
Repertoire89
Cat



Registered: 11/15/12
Posts: 21,773
|
Re: Why didn't he pray for his son? [Re: Icelander]
#18896550 - 09/26/13 11:05 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said:
Because I told you there are rules to this forum? 
|
Raven Gnosis
𝔰𝔢𝔯𝔭𝔢𝔫𝔱𝔦𝔠𝔦𝔡𝔞


Registered: 02/10/11
Posts: 1,311
Loc: Necoc Yaotl
|
|
Quote:
OrgoneConclusion said:
Quote:
57-71 said:
Quote:
OrgoneConclusion said:
Quote:
I have yet to hear a single politician or judge claim that plants and fungi offend Christianity (the dominant ingrained religion of the lawmakers and legal system in the west). If you could provide source for this I will appreciate it. The US leads the western world in the "war on drugs" - a political means to again, subjugate a class of people and support friends of the elected who run the business of prisons.
When the Spanish conquistadors took over Mexico and Central America, Franciscan priests spread the Christian teachings. The natives said they did not need an intermediary to God when they could speak directly to him under the influence of teonanacatl (magic mushrooms). Shortly thereafter the Franciscans made it a capital offense to partake of mushrooms.
Alcohol prohibition was certainly funded and backed by churches. They put enormous pressure on politicians.
As to marijuana, how many atheists would call it 'The Devil's Weed'? The whole idea that ingesting some plants is moral and other plants is immoral is certainly based on religious belief.
Seriously? Conquistadors? riiiiight.
What part are you struggling with? The first large scale prohibition of fungi was sanctioned by The Church. That same attitude carries forward to this day.
Fucking Hippiecrits, gobbling down Amanita Muscaria with one hand and shunning Psilocybes with the other. 
-------------------- To be human is to be fettered, to endure what one is, in perpetuum, no matter what the debility or perversity.
|
57-71
Stranger


Registered: 10/03/09
Posts: 289
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 10 years, 2 months
|
Re: Why didn't he pray for his son? [Re: Icelander]
#18900070 - 09/27/13 07:02 PM (10 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
I have bolded your words as reminder of what facts are. As for the rest of the post, how utterly pharisaic. Well done.
Because I told you there are rules to this forum? 
No, not because you told me there are rules. I give you a lot more credit for intelligence than that Icelander, however you must have missed the intent. Here it is
Because of the way you explained the rules and then skated around the question I had way back in the thread about the rules, as well as all the other posters who ignored the question/allegation.
So I will re-pose the question: Can I make threads or post in threads, personalisms, if the object of said personalisms is not a poster here?
|
|