Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Rick Sumner · 07-08-2006, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solo

Despite my appreciation for your effort to decode the meaning of the sentence, I think it would be fairer to everyone to treat it for what it is, an unintelligible word salad.

:notworthy: :notworthy: :notworthy:

Regards,
Rick Sumner

Chris Weimer · 07-08-2006, 07:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julian

That's exactly my point. Credentials (or great knowledge) make you qualified to judge the argument. Not to make the argument (although it probably would), but to judge it. And that's the crux of the matter, our ability to assess arguments is entirely based on our (the readers') ability.

Julian

I disagree. People without knowledge generally have less of an ability to make it. It works both ways. Once again, the grocery bagger will have much less an ability to make a decent argument than one with a degree.

mountainman · 07-09-2006, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JKelly

tenant=a person who rents land or property from a landlord
tenet = a doctrine, dogma or principle held by a group or person
OED.

tenure = the rent of intellectual property associated with tenets in return for
academic lodgings

QED

mountainman · 07-09-2006, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solo

Despite my appreciation for your effort to decode the meaning of the sentence, I think it would be fairer to everyone to treat it for what it is, an unintelligible word salad.

JS

The reference to physics is not appropriate to follow up in this forum
However the reference to different "creeds" of emotional containment
(See ocean below) may need to be elucidated.

The creeds of emotional containment are simply the various creeds
of religions on this planet that life shares. The analogy to an ocean,
referenced to above, but snipped, is a reference to the comments of
Martin Luther King.

The thread: http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=165331

Where we discuss ...

Quote:
"To discuss Christianity without mentioning other religions
would be like discussing the greatness of the Atlantic Ocean
without the slightest mention of the many tributaries
that keep it flowing."
SOURCED FROM: "The Influence of the Mystery Religions on Christianity"
[29 November 1949-15 February 1950] [Chester, Pa.]
http://www.stanford.edu/group/King/p...ristianity.htm[/quote]

The religion and philosophy of christianity is clearly perceived as being
one ocean on the planet - the Atlantic - amidst the other great and
enduring planetary oceans. Christianity is but one of the global seas.

Its tributaries are not oceanic, but terrestrial rivers which feed the ocean.
King is trying to say (IMHO) not only is christianity just one of the oceans,
but its essence (water) has nothing whatsoever to do with the name of
the ocean.

That water (spirituality???) is the essence of all religions.

I admire King for this global non-exclusivity which is most uncommon
in the minds of those who perceive themselves to be the Atlantic
christians.

If all christians would subscribe to this beautiful quality of expansive
and natural NON-EXCLUSIVITY then the world would be a better place,
in many dimensions of this thing we call humanity.

Pete Brown
http://www.mountainman.com.au/namaste_2006.htm
NAMASTE: “The spirit in me honours the spirit in you”

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.