Incorrect. Reincarnation follows from the Eliminative Ontic Structural Subjective Idealism metaphysics that I've been describing here. There have been...
Moderators &/or administrators: The reason why I flagged a post by S. on this page was because it's inappropriate for him to share about and solicit f...
. I’ve stated the purpose of my participation in this thread. It isn’t to provide religious instruction or explanation to you. ….or to propose or advo...
. 1. First, of course I’ve repeatedly said during this discussion that I don’t usually use the word “God”, other than when replying to someone who has...
. As opposed to other Theisms. . . As I’ve already explained, I’ve amply discussed my impressions, beliefs, and reasons for them, at other threads. . ...
Harry Hindu quoted me: . No, You’re the one making a sweeping blanket-claim. If you claim that there’s no evidence for any of the diverse variety of b...
Yes, Theists shouldn't waste time debating Atheists. As I said, I don't directly debate the matter. I've just been questioning what Atheists mean or a...
The answer to most of Harry’s post: . I refer Harry to my post that he’s “replying to”. He shouldn’t need for it to be repeated to him. He’s just cont...
. If you want to make a claim about mistakes in logic, you’d need to be more specific. . . For one thing, different Theists (the ones who make claims)...
. No, you don’t. . You know what some Theists believe. . You know what you used to believe, and what your acquaintances and co-worshippers, you pastor...
Bertrand Russel was quoted: Regarding religion, I'd say it's unprovable, un-assertable matters. But I don't know if "speculation" is the right word. "...
: . 1. Because some of us are befuddled by a belief in what we incorrectly imagine to be reason. . 2. If reason is the path to (toward) faith, that ne...
Of course, and so it would make a lot more sense if you could confine your comments to a particular specific belief, if you feel a need to make an iss...
. Call it what you want, but “True-Believing Science-Worshippers” isn’t an exaggeration. . There are actually people who believe that science, logic a...
. Certainly. . . Especially if it starts out bad or adversely. . . Parenting, good or bad, can make all the difference in the child’s life, at the tim...
I'd said: I shouldn't say "objectively exist", when speaking of any of what is in the describable world. By the way, regarding the abstract implicatio...
Yes, Subjective Idealism really seems right. There are various definitions of Solipsism, Maybe the Ontic Structural Subjective Idealism that I've been...
. It refers to something that I’d said earlier in the thread. By the metaphysics that I propose, you’re in a life because you’re the protagonist of a ...
No, don't feel angry or resentful because you were born. As I said, you're the reason why you were born. It would be futile and pointless to be angry ...
We didn't choose our parents. But we're the reason why we're in a life. ...for the reason that I mentioned in my previous post. Out predispositions an...
Thank you for sharing with us your unique knowledge of the necessary nature of the one true God, even though your God is only one of various different...
Reason is that standard by which you're judging the matter. And that's where you're wrong. Reason isn't applicable to everything. Only a True-Believin...
Alright, you meant that you're suggesting that there is God, and you were just saying that God isn't what you referred to in your thread-title. Sure, ...
Then feel free to consider it. ...and believe in it if you want to. Of course that's the definition of the One-True-God for Atheists and other Biblica...
When a criminal commits a crime, his parents, heredity, and societal influences are fully to blame...and so is he. It isn't either/.or. Likewise your ...
. You haven’t non-circularly told what you mean by “reality”, “exist” or “actual”. You’ve said that it has to do with things that act on something or ...
I didn't mean to compare myself to written theoretical guidelines. I meant to compare myself to actual conduct. Undeniably, easily-demonstrably, with ...
Oh I don't know...The whole point is to answer what someone said, not necessarily to convince them. Did you think that anyone would consider that even...
Engage? Meaningful conversation? I guess that's what you call your oblivious interminable repetition of your same old assertions. It's more of a never...
That would be a good question to ask Biblical LIteralists next time they knock on your door. But this is a philosophy-forum. The notion of Hell as the...
In the ongoing context of your long failure to support your comments, or to answer or listen to others' comments, eventual blunt language is inevitabl...
. We get that from the news too. . . Exactly—It’s largely or mostly in the societal structure. . But no, you won’t change that. . . No sh*t. . . You s...
. Of course. That’s what I’ve been saying all along, when such matters are discussed at these forums. . . No, that’s a theory, an unsupported assumpti...
. I agree with the usage of those who define “this universe” as our Big-Bang Universe (BBU), and any physically-inter-related multiverse of which it i...
Your symbolic jargon is getting in the way of your knowing what you're saying. Better to say it in English. So, without the jargon, can you say what i...
Characters in a story act on eachother. Are they actual? Maybe best to stick with Lewis's definition of "Actual": "in, of, part of, or consisting of, ...
Thanks for the reasonable grammatical comments, which I agree with. But: Maybe "Jo ate the cake, but that one didn't like it" would be better. When I ...
I don't see how, unless it's taken to the extreme of criticizing the rest of us for accepting the physical nature that we were born as. ...if it's a c...
They are. It's just a question of form for those who want to observe that particular progressive courtesy. No one's suggesting that any grammar should...
But many progressives want there to be a wide progressive unity, as wide as possible. ...including when something doesn't seem very important to most,...
You said: But you don't know what you mean by "actual". Or, if you do know what you mean by it, you're keeping it to yourself. You see, that's where y...
As David Lewis pointed out, there's no need to say that those identical things (or persons) in other possibility-worlds are the same person. Instead, ...
Yes, I see what you mean. "They" is already in wide use for referring to some unspecified one person, and so why not use it to refer to a specified on...
...distinctions whose advocates can't specify what they mean by them. You believe in an un-acknowledged and unsupported assumption that the physical w...
Much, most or all of the discussion about God here is from Atheists. But, to answer your question, Benevolence is its own purpose, and doesn't need an...
I'd like to emphasize that I'm not saying that David Lewis speaks for me. I just wanted to mention that he said some things that I say, but I also men...
Comments