Avatar
Please consider registering
guest
sp_LogInOut Log In sp_Registration Register
Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search
Forum Scope


Match



Forum Options



Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters
sp_TopicIcon
Let's toss "bashing" around for a liittle bit
July 24, 2007
10:51 pm
Avatar
free
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 433
Member Since:
September 27, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

hi bevdee

You wrote this above:

"In defending the bash cry, you say, "....though, I think that the people who stop responding[because of the bash cry?] have responsibility for that action."

First I didn't see myself as defending a bash cry and I'm not sure what you mean by that. Secondly, I didn't mean stop responding because of a bash cry, but stop responding because of what has been posted- anything. Some religious people stopped posting too, bev, not just atheist, agnostic, and antitheist.

Yeah I see wildfires here, too. Have seen them over the years. But those who stick them out usually learn a great deal and calm ensues. Things get worked out. People work things out when they stick to it. I don't think walking away is the best answer, I think agreeing to disagree is, and then leaving it there. IMO

free

July 25, 2007
12:23 am
Avatar
Worried_Dad
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 43
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

To me, "argument" is not a bad thing.

An argument is different from a "fight."

An "argument" is merely the offering of an opinion combined with evidence and reasoning--sometimes in the face of opposing arguments.

For example:

Galileo argued that Jupiter is orbited by at least four moons. His evidence was he had watched it happening through his telescope.

The church's argument against him was that the Pope disagreed.

Then the church raised it to the level of "fight" by saying anyone who says Jupiter has moons is a heretic, and if you say that again you will be arrested, imprisoned, and maybe executed.

Glaileo turned out to be right.

Kekule made an argument about the molecular structure of a chemical call Benzene. He argued that the reason that Benzene molecules has a weight, boiling point, and stability other than predicted by orthodox chemistry of the time, was because Benzene was actually ring-shaped hexagonal molecule.

His famous critic took it to the level of "fight" by referring to the fact that Kekule belonged to a veterinary school, and so could not possibly be a legitimate chemist.

Turns out Kekule was right.

Nothing wrong with arguing. But when arguments are countered with insults, ridicule, persecution, or violence, that's a problem.

July 25, 2007
12:45 am
Avatar
red blonde
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I am confused. Are you arguing whether there is a God, whether the is no God or whose God is the best God? Are you arguing about the best way to get to God? Whose beliefs are better than someone else's beliefs? Whose way of thinking is the best?

And what if someone doesn't really have or think that they have any beliefs or belief system?

Perhaps I am seeking answers to which there are no true answers.

Forum Timezone: UTC -8
Most Users Ever Online: 247
Currently Online:
31
Guest(s)
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
onedaythiswillpass: 1134
zarathustra: 562
StronginHim77: 453
free: 433
2013ways: 431
curious64: 408
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 49
Members: 110935
Moderators: 5
Admins: 3
Forum Stats:
Groups: 8
Forums: 74
Topics: 38542
Posts: 714222
Newest Members:
jessicawales, documentsonline, SafeWork, thomasalina, genericsmartdrugs, 才艺
Moderators: arochaIB: 1, devadmin: 9, Tincho: 0, Donn Gruta: 0, Germain Palacios: 0
Administrators: admin: 21, ShiningLight: 572, emily430: 29

Copyright © 2019 MH Sub I, LLC. All rights reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Policy | Health Disclaimer