|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eloquent Conversationalist
|
 Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 5:47 am
Good point. Well, I responded to her question in good faith. I've heard that question a lot, and most people are satisfied with the answers I can give. I'm sure her question would be answered much better by a real scholar or by a rabbi, but I'm sad to say she probably won't seek out a rabbi or scholar.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 7:23 am
That's because I really don't think her question was in good faith. She came into it with the wrong attitude, a defensive one, rather than being willing to learn.
Hopefully someday she'll realize that, and open herself up to learning.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eloquent Conversationalist
|
Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 9:13 am
From your lips to G*D's ears, as we say in the Jewish community. wink
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 3:25 pm
I'm proud of everyone on this Guild for how they've been courteous and respectful to one another, even when we have questions or we don't understand each other. I felt that this particular member was too negative to perpetuate any sort of fulfilling discourse, so I banned her, but I felt a little bad about it for some reason so I felt it might be a good idea to present her side of the story (since she insisted on breaking the rules and PM'ing me about it). I did get one last PM from her, but I decided not to reply so that she would stop sending me messages, and it looks like that has worked.Moonlite Symphony At this point it really is sort of sad.
At the absolute LEAST the discussion was about the languages relating to religion. The fecal matter comparison was simply the words. Look at the back of the "friendly" version of The Matrix: Reloaded soundtrack. "This Is The New Sh*t" is the seccond track, or so I remember. Now I see people saying "g-d," To me it conjures up certain a striking similarity.
As well you mentioned I think that I'd have a hard time finding the logical argument for "enlightment or something like that? I'm not really going to bother being absolute about it because I don't want to spend much time on it. There is no "enlightenment" in buddhism. Nirvana at best translates to "knowing." The idea of buddhist nirvana is that by reaching a level of utilitarianism and knowingness yo uare capable of findign a last and real happiness that comes from the appreciation of every moment. Nirvana is just the state of sublime "knowing" which allwos a person to be truly happy.
The reason I decided to PM you isn't because I wanted back into the guild. I can get along perfectly fine with ED. I was invited into the guild so it isn't even so much my fault the problem happened. Maybe I wasn't completely pleasant but I was asked into it.
Ultimately I PMed you because I figured discussing problems would be slightly more pro-active than ignoring them. I think the style of "ban and ignore" is very facist feeling. It seems militant and counterproductive to a group suppsoedly based on "understanding."
It wasn't an attack, it wasn't an attempt at "disproving someone elses beliefs." I wanted some one, anyone, to find me the logic in the discussed topic. I think logic is necesary, I don't like any belief that actually can say to itself "now this doesn't make any sense but believe it anyone." I'm not going to tell someone that's okay. I may not run around saying "YOU'RE ALL FOOLS!" but I would love for people to try and explain things logically. Whn I look for a reason for something, I don't look for a dismissing statement or an excuse. I want logical reason.
I appologize for ruffling your feathers so much that you felt compelled to just blatantly insult me. It would seem your guild is more a subjective utopean ideal than it is a real place for any level of worthwhile discusson if controversy is simply dismissed.
I think sometimes people (primarily on the internet) have trouble with me going between sometimes cynicism laden humorist sarcasm, or very sincere literalism. Like the "recent history" remark. It was no jab it you it was simply literalism. just like comparing god to s**t (apparently). It is a literal comparison. Personally I wouldn't compare somethign that doesn't exist with s**t because I think that presents fundamental flaw but that's fine.
Your guild, have fun with it.
I guess my last thought on the subject (since I'm just writing train-of-thought on this) is that rather than try and discuss the problem with me first hand. Maybe settle the disagreement and act very mature and reasonable, it seems everyone just got upset and swung down the banhammer. I'm not saying do a "three strikes you're out" but maybe resolving issues rather than being so dogmatially dismissive (like O'Riley or Evangelicals?) maybe try and be pro-active and possitive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 26, 2007 10:23 am
From everything I've read in this entire thread, I can't honestly say that anyone was exactly respectful or courteous to the negative member. At least that is my perspective of the situation.
So back on topic... I find it rather disrespectful to another's beliefs to force someone to write/type "God". In the English language, the word "God" is used as a proper noun. My bigoted high school English teacher told us all it was used as a proper noun because "it is the only real god", which is incorrect.
Her logic was flawed not because of her perspective of her deity being the only real one, but it was linguistically flawed because the proper noun "God" is used to replace a name. Names are always considered proper nouns. When we replace a name with another word or series of words, it is always considered a proper noun.
For example; Mary is quite contrary, so her "friends" decide to call her The Contrary One.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 26, 2007 7:23 pm
Lila Malvae From everything I've read in this entire thread, I can't honestly say that anyone was exactly respectful or courteous to the negative member. At least that is my perspective of the situation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 28, 2007 12:05 pm
roothands I'm proud of everyone on this Guild for how they've been courteous and respectful to one another, even when we have questions or we don't understand each other. I felt that this particular member was too negative to perpetuate any sort of fulfilling discourse, so I banned her, but I felt a little bad about it for some reason so I felt it might be a good idea to present her side of the story (since she insisted on breaking the rules and PM'ing me about it). I did get one last PM from her, but I decided not to reply so that she would stop sending me messages, and it looks like that has worked.Moonlite Symphony At this point it really is sort of sad.
At the absolute LEAST the discussion was about the languages relating to religion. The fecal matter comparison was simply the words. Look at the back of the "friendly" version of The Matrix: Reloaded soundtrack. "This Is The New Sh*t" is the seccond track, or so I remember. Now I see people saying "g-d," To me it conjures up certain a striking similarity.
As well you mentioned I think that I'd have a hard time finding the logical argument for "enlightment or something like that? I'm not really going to bother being absolute about it because I don't want to spend much time on it. There is no "enlightenment" in buddhism. Nirvana at best translates to "knowing." The idea of buddhist nirvana is that by reaching a level of utilitarianism and knowingness yo uare capable of findign a last and real happiness that comes from the appreciation of every moment. Nirvana is just the state of sublime "knowing" which allwos a person to be truly happy.
The reason I decided to PM you isn't because I wanted back into the guild. I can get along perfectly fine with ED. I was invited into the guild so it isn't even so much my fault the problem happened. Maybe I wasn't completely pleasant but I was asked into it.
Ultimately I PMed you because I figured discussing problems would be slightly more pro-active than ignoring them. I think the style of "ban and ignore" is very facist feeling. It seems militant and counterproductive to a group suppsoedly based on "understanding."
It wasn't an attack, it wasn't an attempt at "disproving someone elses beliefs." I wanted some one, anyone, to find me the logic in the discussed topic. I think logic is necesary, I don't like any belief that actually can say to itself "now this doesn't make any sense but believe it anyone." I'm not going to tell someone that's okay. I may not run around saying "YOU'RE ALL FOOLS!" but I would love for people to try and explain things logically. Whn I look for a reason for something, I don't look for a dismissing statement or an excuse. I want logical reason.
I appologize for ruffling your feathers so much that you felt compelled to just blatantly insult me. It would seem your guild is more a subjective utopean ideal than it is a real place for any level of worthwhile discusson if controversy is simply dismissed.
I think sometimes people (primarily on the internet) have trouble with me going between sometimes cynicism laden humorist sarcasm, or very sincere literalism. Like the "recent history" remark. It was no jab it you it was simply literalism. just like comparing god to s**t (apparently). It is a literal comparison. Personally I wouldn't compare somethign that doesn't exist with s**t because I think that presents fundamental flaw but that's fine.
Your guild, have fun with it.
I guess my last thought on the subject (since I'm just writing train-of-thought on this) is that rather than try and discuss the problem with me first hand. Maybe settle the disagreement and act very mature and reasonable, it seems everyone just got upset and swung down the banhammer. I'm not saying do a "three strikes you're out" but maybe resolving issues rather than being so dogmatially dismissive (like O'Riley or Evangelicals?) maybe try and be pro-active and possitive. Haha. Pro-active and positive. That's funny. Someone keep me from flaming her, srsly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
