Are you a Christian?

Lol, I won't hold being male against ya. It wasn't your fault, ha!

Just kiddin. I misunderstand half the time. But not nearly as often as I say confusing things that no one gets but me. The ol, "That made perfectly logical sense when it was in my head, what has the real world done to it!" thing. :D

Maybe that's a girl thing. Maybe that's why guys get so confused...

Nah! Prolly just me... curses...
 
Saltmeister said:
The term "mental illness" to me is much like a propaganda term used to achieve social hegemony. It's like a form of racism. "Mental illness" is used often by people who are trying to label someone as inferior, diseased or as functioning on a subhuman level. It's like you're saying to someone that they are not functioning at full capacity. They're malfunctioning. They're defective.

You're criticising people for being obsessed with heroics and adventurism. Heroes and legends are ideas, so this is an "ideological racism." It's a racism of ideas. You're devaluing someone's ideas, discrediting them, deeming those people less important in society and effectively creating "virtual social classes" in your mind.

I wonder who is the one suffering from a "mental illness" here.:eek::rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Since you did not comprehend what I was saying I will take another shot at it (you totally missed my point)
Here goes:
It is the right thing to do, to help another , rather than to harm them.(*)note the asterisk thing
Click to expand...
Then I asked the rhetorical why?
answered with
It just is.
(as in, it is the right thing to do,to help others as opposed to harming others)

Followed by my lament, as to:

Why do such obvious things need all these useless explanations?

One must be mentally ill to need an explanation for the above.(*)note the asterisk again (meaning this sentence refers to the other one with the same asterisk.
So I hope that clears that up:D
 
citizenzen said:
Actually, I don't think Shawn is criticizing people or devaluing ideas. He is merely pointing out that goodness, selflessness, empathy and compassion are natural human behaviors and do not require God or religion to be realized or exercised. That seems to be a point of contention with some Christians. He is attempting to broaden their outlook on the matter.

Sounds pretty sane to me.
Click to expand...

While I was responding to Shawn's words, I wasn't necessarily talking back at Shawn. I spend more of my time here on this message board talking about straw men than referring specifically to anyone. Yet, the straw man could also be a phenomenon that includes the person to whom I am responding or replying. The funny thing is that people will never know for sure.:D Well, at least they should never know. Mwhahahahaha.:D This is how I can talk about people behind their backs.

Even when I used the pronoun "You" I wasn't necessarily referring to Shawn. The pronoun "you" is often used to refer to a third person other than the person to which you are talking.

For all intents and purposes, I could really have been talking about Citizenzen but carefully masking it in a reply to Shawn. You never know.

Saltmeister said:
You're criticising people for being obsessed with heroics and adventurism. Heroes and legends are ideas, so this is an "ideological racism." It's a racism of ideas. You're devaluing someone's ideas, discrediting them, deeming those people less important in society and effectively creating "virtual social classes" in your mind.
Click to expand...

But things would have been different if I said the following.

Saltmeister said:
Shawn, you're criticising people for being obsessed with heroics and adventurism. Heroes and legends are ideas, so this is an "ideological racism." It's a racism of ideas. You're devaluing someone's ideas, discrediting them, deeming those people less important in society and effectively creating "virtual social classes" in your mind.
Click to expand...

While I admit that some of what I said was a little provocative, it was mostly intended as harmless but purposeful commentary.

shawn said:
Since you did not comprehend what I was saying I will take another shot at it (you totally missed my point)
Here goes:

Why do such obvious things need all these useless explanations?

One must be mentally ill to need an explanation for the above.(*)note the asterisk again (meaning this sentence refers to the other one with the same asterisk.
Click to expand...

One would hope that the author's intention was not to demonise, vilify or belittle anyone, but the author's intention is one thing and the reader's interpretation is quite another.:) There is what you intended the words to mean, and what a person in this thread thought you were meaning.:eek:

Here is how I might have interpreted your post:

shawn said:
1. All the rest of these notions people come up with is just over-dramatization of simple things.
2. It is the right thing to do to help another rather than to harm them.*
WHY?
It just is.
3. Why do such obvious things need all these useless explanations?
4. One must be mentally ill to need an explanation for the above.(*)
Click to expand...

1 and 3. The people of interest are irrationally and exaggerating things beyond proportion. Redundant statements are being made. Unnecessary metaphors are being used. A pompous ceremony is being conducted just to attract attention. People are saying more than they need to say. Specks are made into mountains. This is considered to be "stupid."
2. Considered irrelevant.
4. I didn't know why the asterisk was there, but the phrase "useless explanations" means just the same as what it did before even if I did understand. The thoughts and behaviour of some in conjuring up "unnecessary stories and metaphors" is ridiculed and considered despicable.

This is an alternate interpretation to your post. A piece of literature can have a hundred different interpretations. There is what the author (you, God) intended the literature (your words/post, the Bible) it to mean and what a reader (you, me, myself and Irene, Tom, Dick and Harry) may think it means.

shawn said:
So I hope that clears that up:D
Click to expand...

Why did you put that smilie there? Do you somehow find this amusing?:mad:
 
shawn said:
This is semantical misdirection.
Click to expand...
I don't think so.

shawn said:
People either act noble or they do not.
Click to expand...
My point is not the act, but the intention behind the act — not what people do but why they do it. It depends on one's definition of nobility.

shawn said:
"For the glory of God", has a very nice ring to it, but it means naught.
Click to expand...
Nonsense. It has a meaning if you believe in God, it doesn't if you don't.

shawn said:
It all has to do with harmony.
Click to expand...
Again, who's definition of harmony? I agree with you, but the harmony I'm talking about is the harmony of heaven and earth. It's a matter of vision, or paradigmatic horizon.

Thomas
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by shawn
It all has to do with harmony.

Again, who's definition of harmony? I agree with you, but the harmony I'm talking about is the harmony of heaven and earth. It's a matter of vision, or paradigmatic horizon.

Thomas
Click to expand...
There is a universal harmony which cares not about our individual interpretations and misconceptions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by shawn
"For the glory of God", has a very nice ring to it, but it means naught.

Nonsense. It has a meaning if you believe in God, it doesn't if you don't.
Click to expand...
I believe in God and I still say the same, that people who act out whatever they may for such reasons still is just a dramatic bit of line.
Cheap theatrics.
Like the movie Kingdom of Heaven where the crusader chap was motivating his troops with the insufferable "God wills it".
People act from self interest.
Even if they lay their lives down for someone or something, it has its root in the ideology which they cherish.
Either that or they are exceedingly simple and have abdicated responsibility and let others do their thinking for them.
 
OK salty,
again from the top.
One must be mentally ill if they need an explanation as to why it is the right thing to do to help others rather than harm them.
Do you have that straight then?
Sorry to boggle you.
The joy of forums, they can be so misread.
But this is a good thing as it helps the participating individuals sharpen up their rhetoric.
And yes, it was mildly amusing, but that is not the reason I put the smilie there.
And no, I am not telling.
 
shawn said:
There is a universal harmony which cares not about our individual interpretations and misconceptions.
Click to expand...
Indeed so, because they're out of synch with the universe ... but if one seeks that harmony, then there is a resonance ... and if one seeks what is beyond the universe, ditto.

shawn said:
Even if they lay their lives down for someone or something, it has its root in the ideology which they cherish.
Click to expand...
And if that ideology is Christian ...

But this is besides the point. Because you are motivated only be self-interest, what right have you to assume everyone else does the same? And indeed, how would you even know? You're just making assumptions, unless you've interrogated everybody regarding their motivation for doing what they do.

Thomas
 
Should I now put a disclaimer onto every opinion that I offer?

(*Based on the knowledge gleaned from the many hundreds of people whom I have known.)

But since you bring it up, Yes, I posit that, say, everyone who is here on this site is here for reasons of self interest.
Further, that all good that people have done, in fact, every act that humans have committed (other than accidents) have been done (at the root of the impulse of the action) from reasons of self-interest.
Thomas:
But this is besides the point. Because you are motivated only be self-interest, what right have you to assume everyone else does the same?
Click to expand...
What right, indeed.?!
 
Thomas said:
But this is besides the point. Because you are motivated only be self-interest, what right have you to assume everyone else does the same?
Click to expand...

Thomas, haven't you just leapt to a sweeping assumption about Shawn?

Hello... Pot on line one calling the kettle black.
 
citizenzen said:
Like that clears anything up!
Click to expand...
That (pre-Christian) scripture describes the system that is naturally a part of being human--having the law written on their hearts. (You can substitute the Buddhist term citta here, as it is referring to the same thing, imo.) Christianity describes this state as being "veiled," whereas Buddhism describes this as being "obscured." What's the difference? The idea is to have that veil/obscuration taken away.
 
shawn said:
Further, that all good that people have done, in fact, every act that humans have committed (other than accidents) have been done (at the root of the impulse of the action) from reasons of self-interest.
Click to expand...
OK. Your opinion on the matter ... I disagree.

Thomas
 
Thomas said:
Not really ... just working from what he says — everyone acts out of self-interest.
Click to expand...

Everyone does act out of self-interest, but not all of the time. You accused Shawn of acting only out of self interest. That was a fallacious and unfair accusation.

Sister Mary Catherine would like to see you in her office.

citizenzen-albums-my-silly-stuff-picture1061-sister-mary-catherine.jpeg
 
Er ... I think I'd ask Sr Mary Catherine to read post 53 and then explain to me how I'm wrong?

Thomas
 
Thomas said:
But this is besides the point. Because you are motivated only be self-interest, what right have you to assume everyone else does the same? And indeed, how would you even know? You're just making assumptions, unless you've interrogated everybody regarding their motivation for doing what they do.
Click to expand...

She's gonna spank you over post #52... not #53.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top