You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #41: Actually, I said the necessary ambiguity is subject to resolution through PROCESS [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Religion/Theology Donate to DU
Land Shark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-06-09 07:01 PM
Response to Reply #36
41. Actually, I said the necessary ambiguity is subject to resolution through PROCESS
When people stand off, even on their own TV shows, (ala Jon Stewart and Jim Cramer) they can toss talking points or brickbats forever. But when they are forced into a real engagement, as when Cramer went on Stewart's Daily Show, a type of accountability is created, and, in that case, Stewart demolished Cramer. The Daily show quasi-"debate" format is but one of many examples of types of direct dialog/give and take that are the kinds of "process" I'm speaking of that help to resolve the incipient status quo of freedom allowing for nearly any conceivable opinion to simultaneously co-exist.

Some analogous process would benefit here, as I don't think you're fairly characterizing what I'm saying at all, and if that process had a third party it could provide feedback, or perhaps a "ruling" if the process allowed that, on whether or not characterizations of yours (for example) or mine, for that matter, are fair or not, and whether or not questions have been answered. That would help move things down the road.

Until we can, for example, agree on a neutral third party (as just one but not the only example of process) we're stuck or stymied at the point where you mischaracterize my position. For example, the "insult" i referred to is to the good faith SELFLESS believers, whose personal positions (and assets, and time) have yielded to the results of a sincere quest for God's will, but who under the terms of the study are lumped in with "egocentric" believers who merely project their personal desires onto God. The study is an insult to a portion of the people classified as egocentric, but not to all -- and this is taking the study on its own terms, as advertised. I might take issue with and argue against the study but before doing that I would read the whole thing, which I haven't yet done. Therefore I give it the benefit of every doubt and take it at face value, and at that point I find it lacking in the way I've described.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
  -Creating God in one's own image: laconicsax  Dec-01-09 06:31 PM   #0 
  - How about this....  murray hill farm   Dec-01-09 06:42 PM   #1 
  - Sounds about right.  laconicsax   Dec-01-09 06:50 PM   #2 
  - I have done as he/she has asked  Angry Dragon   Dec-01-09 06:53 PM   #3 
  - Hallelujah!  laconicsax   Dec-01-09 06:58 PM   #4 
  - that is the conclusion that i came to when i took a comparative religion  mopinko   Dec-01-09 07:53 PM   #5 
  - And that's the whole point  MorningGlow   Dec-02-09 08:01 AM   #6 
  - Excellent post. (n/t)  Nihil   Dec-02-09 09:43 AM   #9 
  - "The kingdom of heaven is within"  RagAss   Dec-02-09 10:48 PM   #23 
  - The answer to "what would I do?"  bsd13   Dec-02-09 08:27 AM   #7 
  - I think you missed the point of the OP.  darkstar3   Dec-02-09 09:38 AM   #8 
  - Then we might disagree on who Jesus is...  bsd13   Dec-02-09 10:10 AM   #10 
     - Did you not read the article?  laconicsax   Dec-02-09 04:53 PM   #16 
     - Yes, I see that and understand what's being said  bsd13   Dec-02-09 06:24 PM   #18 
     - Deleted message  Name removed   Dec-06-09 12:25 AM   #28 
     - Yes, but one might expect that when people change their position, their estimate of  struggle4progress   Dec-02-09 06:28 PM   #19 
     - Sweet Jesus, we got a live one!!!!  rd_kent   Dec-06-09 12:23 AM   #27 
  - DO you know what reading comprehension is?  rd_kent   Dec-06-09 12:22 AM   #26 
  - I totally agree with...  Meshuga   Dec-02-09 10:26 AM   #11 
  - No reference to a title or journal? The link indicates the study occurs in PNAS, but  struggle4progress   Dec-02-09 12:49 PM   #12 
  - The paper is available online.  Jim__   Dec-02-09 01:45 PM   #13 
     - Many thanks!  struggle4progress   Dec-02-09 02:26 PM   #14 
  - I wonder whether this reflects a more general phenomenon, which really has nothing to do with  struggle4progress   Dec-02-09 04:31 PM   #15 
  - While what you say may be true,  darkstar3   Dec-02-09 06:09 PM   #17 
  - If what I suggested is true, then an argument entirely parallel to yours would similarly force  struggle4progress   Dec-02-09 06:42 PM   #20 
     - I said it MAY be true,  darkstar3   Dec-02-09 06:59 PM   #21 
        - I've just completed my spiritual/psychological study on Darkstar3  Land Shark   Dec-06-09 12:28 AM   #29 
           - And you, too, missed the entire point of the article.  darkstar3   Dec-06-09 12:49 AM   #30 
              - Let me see if I understand what you're saying here:  Land Shark   Dec-06-09 01:18 AM   #31 
                 - Here's a point by point for you:  darkstar3   Dec-06-09 01:45 AM   #32 
                    - I don't think that suffices for "point by point" but here goes;  Land Shark   Dec-06-09 02:04 AM   #33 
                    - Another attempt at simple dismissal.  darkstar3   Dec-06-09 02:31 AM   #34 
                       - Perhaps this will clear it up a bit...  Land Shark   Dec-06-09 05:47 AM   #35 
                          - No clarification there.  darkstar3   Dec-06-09 02:40 PM   #36 
                             - Actually, I said the necessary ambiguity is subject to resolution through PROCESS  Land Shark   Dec-06-09 07:01 PM   #41 
                                - You still haven't answered why this process is important.  darkstar3   Dec-06-09 07:58 PM   #44 
                    - 'The same cannot be said of God, who is referred to as "the same yesterday,  Joe Chi Minh   Dec-06-09 03:44 PM   #37 
                       - Nice try, but false.  darkstar3   Dec-06-09 04:14 PM   #38 
                          - No. It would be a waste of effort responding to your post. You are too naive about  Joe Chi Minh   Dec-06-09 04:41 PM   #39 
                             - So, as you're unable to answer any of my questions,  darkstar3   Dec-06-09 05:06 PM   #40 
                                - If the universe and all life was created from purely material chemical/mechanistic processes....  Land Shark   Dec-06-09 07:14 PM   #42 
                                   - That ^^^ was a stirring reply.  darkstar3   Dec-06-09 07:38 PM   #43 
  - "everyone believes him/herself to be more more rational than anyone with whom he/she argues"  ZombieHorde   Dec-02-09 09:50 PM   #22 
     - If one doesn't understand one's opponents' arguments, one hardly understands THEIR OWN argument  Land Shark   Dec-05-09 11:58 PM   #25 
  - Interesting article, but seems to contain a fundamental fallacy  Land Shark   Dec-05-09 11:45 PM   #24 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Religion/Theology Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC