Me too. and there are precious few to argue with who know the worth of a nice over -the-top discussion where you find out what the other guy's thinking and no hard feelings - but we're American, right? and it used to be the American pastime - arguing. Now everybody has to be so politically correct all the time - its a beige world.
That's okay - it's nice to have a healthy argument. I must admit though Marine - Sometimes, I used to ask myself if you were paid to place Forum posts. (some organisations advertise for that)..... but cos you've been here so long, I had to dismiss the thought.
Hmm, Those are good questions. Yes, when someone has agreed with me before, I have stated a disagreement to keep the conversatiion going. If we continually agreed, I don't think we would learn as much as from disageeing. Yep, I may also be addicted to winning.
Competitiveness to win, isn't a fault, in any stretch of the imagination. Wanting to win, is in every person, who is human. It is the simple fact- that if you are not competitive, then you haven't found something in your life, that drives that spirit to come alive. And, it's a shame, because that's what drives knowledge and understanding(wisdom). Because, one always wants to feel on top of their game.
You're not out of control if your recognize it, if that's what you mean. Its kinda like a controlled addiction with you, you like to argue but you don't do it to the point where no one will talk to you anymore - so you're not that addicted!
I think everyone wins in the arguement when they choose to learn from the arguement. I don't stop until I do win or until I believe I win, hence the addiction. lol It's hard to pick a topic off hand. Call me stupid and tell me what you are smarter than me in and why you are smarter. You can't use "grammar" or "spelling" or "math"
I have no idea because it doesn't turn me on. Debating - now, that's different. I enjoy having an open-minded debate about a subject where all sides get to air their beliefs or opinions so everyone gets a chance to learn something, even if we can't ultimately agree.
But an argument, where a group of closed-minded people start from a stance of "I'm right and I'm only starting this war to see how many other people I can upset" - if you find that addictive, I don't like to think what that says about your personality.
I think I like both arguements and debating. I think they are pretty much the same. How many debates stay logical not involving insults and arguement? I also think in an arguement, emotions are exposed and the hidden person comes out. Thanks
I can't understand people who turn a debate into insults and mud-slinging, it just seems so pointless because it doesn't achieve anything except to cause needless distress.
In my experience, if a debate degenerates into personal attacks,it doesn't reveal any truths at all. When you back someone into a corner, they'll grasp any defence they can think of, and it's often quite out of character in my experience.
No. It is not logical to say that everyone is insane, because it's not morally right to say, because it's a lie.
To think that ALL people are ignorant. Yes, it is logical to say that all people are ignorant, because not everyone knows everything nor does any one individual know everything. So, ignorance can be understood to be wide spread among everyone.
The more you know, for which is based on facts and that which eliminates lies, you do not ever lose the ability to gain or learn anything, but do receive spirituality because you've learned so much and you still know that there is so much more to learn.
So, knowledge can never limit a person's ability to learn more.
Eh, not convinced that everyone couldn't be logically considered insane. Everyone has a different idea of what insane is. You could believe I am insane for having faith in a creator, I could believe you are insane for saying there is no creator.
I agree, the more you learn by logical truth without contradictions, the more learned overall. I didn't say knowledge could limiting them from learning more, I said that believing they have knowledge could limit them from learning more as any absolute could prevent someone from learning.
If I base it on the fact that I was created by my parents, it could be a logical faith that there is a creator for the beginning. To rule it out when it can't be ruled out with logic would be limiting in my belief. Yours is also based on an assumption that you can't prove wrong with logic, or can you?
How are you planning on turning this around? By asking me, if I jumped to an assumption. I didn't jump to an assumption.
You can not say, EVERYONE is insane. It isn't true. I say that, because I AM not insane. Therefore, your broad implication that everyone is insane, can not be factual. I didn't assume anything, I know for a fact that not everyone is insane.
I think we got crossed up. I'm talking about your faith that there is no creator. Can you rule out a creator?
And I still think everyone is insane. If more people were sane, I think we would have learned from our history by now instead of constantly repeating it. It is logical that I could believe you insane and you could believe me insane and that everyone could believe everyone else is insane making everyone insane. No?
Reality is limited only by individual perspectives or subjective views, in the minds of people. Their inability to see all of reality is what's limited, and that onus is on them.
Reality is limitless, as is knowledge and wisdom. Logic is only limited by reasoning and rationale. So, logic can be applied to almost everything.
Faith is limited. Faith is open to interpretation of an individual person, their experience of living life and what knowledge they have gain, as well, as their wisdom- all play a part in faith. Thus, making faith limited.
That is the precise definition of reality, according to Science and Aristotle, science and philospher professor.
It is how we define our state of being, objectively and not subjectively.
Why we(human race) are here? What in the heck are you looking for a singular reason for mankind, when the singular reason has already been announced to the world many years ago and the only reason why the singular reason has been achieved is because of too many individual's lacking knowledge and understanding of life.
How we got here? Isn't it obvious. Earth created all life on itself. Life exists, accept it and move on.
Lol , Come on, you can't say all these answers are logical and not faith based. If we were given or already knew all of the answers, there would be no evolution would there? Evolution is continuous, not content.
Evolution is continuous. And, it continues on right through this conversation, because "Human Consciousness" is proof of evolution. Your individual consciousness has many different layers of clarity. You are technically, 're-born', everytime you break through to a new level of clarity.
The human consciousness is the highest cause. Why? Because, without it you don't know you are alive. It also allows you to set your own purpose in life, which gives your life meaning and spirituality, if done to help others.
The only thing the human race has to do is, evolve their way of thinking. Everything else evolves continuous. The human way is via the mind, and it's usage.
I agree that all comes from the mind. I disagree with you, I think our consciousness is the only thing that keeps from proving evolution. Our mind is unmapped, it is only limited when you believe you understand it as an absolute.
You don't get it. The missing link to Evolution is the Human Consciousness.
It's not keeping Evolution from being proved. It is proof.
The human race wasn't always conscious. This has been proven by research of early mankind. It's been proven.
What's NOT been proven is from what did we(physically) evolve from to being human. Evolution was proven, the second mankind began consciousness and thought for themselves. The MIND Evolved, from natural guidance(as in animals) to self thinking.
Your individual consciousness....you know...how you can tell you are alive. That sense of life- you can feel through your heartbeat.
If you did NOT have a consciousness, then you wouldn't feel the heart beating.
The mind made that leap from natural guidance, to self-guidance.
Do you get it? That's evolution. Humans evolved their ability, to adapt to societial changes which were happening at the time, because civilizations were getting larger and more complex. It required more self-guiding humans. Therefore, consciousness came to the fore-front, so adaptation could be made.
Ever since consciousness came about in humans, society has exploded.
Why did the mind suddenly make a leap into consciousness? Also, evolution doesn't explain why we are so advanced in our abilities to learn, teach, retain information when other life comes no where close. It can be based on logic, but can only be believed absolute through faith.
You want to describe the 'something'? before you determine it is an absolute. Defining it might help. There are absolutes in life, just because you don't believe there to be, there are.
Everything should be explained? Not everything is going to have an explanation, hence as I said earlier...the exploration of reality is a large enough task.
Faith is place in only yourself or someone else. You can have faith in science, as a person and believe, sooner or later, many questions will be answered, not knowing is what drives us to ask questions.
Belief in science, is because it's proven to work over, and over, and over. Yes, it has it's share of mistakes, but we are only human. We are NOT perfect, and it's accepted, by most rational people.
I also buy and sell on ebay while I am involved in arguemens, so all is not lost. Most to all fighters get punched in the head, no matter how much they learn. I do have to agree with you that it was excellent exercise.
Probably kicked out and banned. I don't think they would like me asking questions. You have to be addicted to books, I get enough reading on here alone. lol . I do read every now and then during the workday.
I can't imagine what your husband must be feeling. One of my son's is coming in tonight for the holiday, before he ships out again next week, I will be adding what he and his breathren have to say about this once I get to talk to him.
oh and wait a minute - there are a hell of a lot of things to argue about besides God and Creationism - like there's the arguement about whether the knives should go in the dishwasher blade up, or blade down. Now lets get down to the really important stuff!
You mean you think the blades should be downward in the dishwasher container thingy? But if they are placed in there so they are standing up with the blade up, then you would see them and not grab them and cut yourself!
Putting the blade downward, instead of sticking up, is to prevent any accidental mishaps, regardless. If sticking upward and someone isn't paying attention, which is the case for most people, there is higher probability that they will cut themselves. So, it's always best to keep them down and out of the way.
I avoid arguing by simply sticking to facts. (When I DO offer my opinion, I make sure it is clear that I differentiate between opinion and facts AND I generally back my opinion with facts.) Doing it my way helps me get back to real writing.
So, then, by consciousness you mean the concept of a "self" that has a soul? Is that what yu mean? Cuz other animals are conscious really - and humans were probably conscious - we didn't have a language. Language is what we developed that gave us a sense of self. Self-consciousness=)
When you can't argue at best because your thinking is limited, you are not addicted. Ridiculous to even think of and as a recovering drug addict find it mocking addicts by categorizing yourself for more attention. Thank you for playing
Lol, how is my thinking limited in comparison with yours? You took it as a personal attack because thats what you wanted to take it as. You are making a faith based assumption that I argue only for attention when I explained why I like to argue. I may be dependent on argueing. Are crackheads not dependent on crack?
Cagsil - I always thought so too! AND THEN one evening my boyfriend and I had a 2 hour long argument about this and he convinced me almost that if the blades are down IN the container you might think they were spoons or forks and you won't see them when you grab them and maybe cut yourself! And then I was trying to come up with a way we could designate one compartment for forks, one for spoons, one for knives and always put them in the dishwasher - and you know, that was just CRAZY and probably the beginning of the end of our relationship. . . so bringing this up here and starting the argument again is just a cry for help=)
It's not a problem. I'm always around to be bounce ideas or thoughts off of. I don't mind. I have wealth of knowledge and a lot of understanding(wisdom), so I'm always willing and confident I can help.
But, to be serious- when filling a dishwasher, regardless of type, the area where silverware is stored, the blades should always be to the inside of the holder. Thus, the handle is always point upward and the blade is out of the way.
That's a great description of wisdom - I think there's also an element of the spiritual, intuitive understanding of life's lessons that perfects one's knowledge of the world -the element of compassion, because without it knowledge and/or wisdom is hollow.
lol everyone has to stop at some point. Not all arguements are won if any. But much is learned whether win or lose. So, you could say both winning and losing would both be winning depending on how you look at it.
No. I was wondering about your response to marine. I looked at it, read it, then re-read it, then re-read it again. Just so I could be sure of something.
And, I was comtemplating on whether or not, I should say something...hence, the hmmm........? post, for which you responded to.
Is this what you were referring to? What I didn't say? And, then you come at me, with a tone in your words, that carry alot of attitude. Because of the way you typed them. That concluded me to draw an idea about you, hence an opinion. I was thinking about whether or not I wanted to share my opinion with you.
Then, I asked, a simple question. Then you get into with me, with your last post. Like, am I suppose to engage you in talk? or thinking for that fact? From what I can draw from your posts, just in the last three- that you would get offended, if I did tell you what I thought about you 'attitude' and how you seem to have issues with something. What, who knows?
But, to out-right disrespect someone, when they didn't do anything to you in the first place- is absolutely inconsiderate.
I was actually making rather lame jokes back there vis a vis the silliness of arguing for the sake of arguing. also to some extent mimicing others' attitudes when getting carried away at times in these forums. All in good fun, Cagsil, all in good fun - nothing personal. really. nuf said.
Post something productive you have just done.Or.Post something productive you intend to do before your day ends.The productive item(s) mentioned can range anywhere from the mundane to the awesome.For example my planned...
I know I am. But chatting with people, discussing world shaking questions, being there for new friends I've made here has made a lot of difference in my life. So maybe I spend a little too much time bumping...