Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: jeremyp on October 08, 2015, 07:24:08 PM
-
Shut the fuck up about philosophical naturalism
-
Shut the fuck up about philosophical naturalism
[size=36pt]Pardon?[/size]
-
Shut the fuck up about philosophical naturalism
Pardon?
Shut the fuck up about philosophical naturalism
-
Shut the fuck up about philosophical naturalism
Pardon?
Shut the fuck up about philosophical naturalism
what....you mean.........
-
Shut the fuck up about philosophical naturalism
Pardon?
Shut the fuck up about philosophical naturalism
what....you mean.........
You heard me.
-
It's a free forum. As I'm told, "if you don't like what's being said, go. You don't have to read it or answer it." Hypocrites! And, as usual, foul-mouthed with it.
-
It's a free forum. As I'm told, "if you don't like what's being said, go. You don't have to read it or answer it." Hypocrites! And, as usual, foul-mouthed with it.
And as usual you take no fucking notice of what you are being fucking told and are still fucking here you annoying - Moderator: content removed. . . . little insect (text substitued for Moderated conent)
No, I am not chucking my toys out of the pram or losing my rag, I am just expressing the depth of my disappointment that you are still here and unable to take you own advice.
-
Naturalism, naturism :o
;D
Close, put the wrong word into google LOL
Philosophical naturism... that'd almost be worth looking into, if only for the giggles :)
O.
-
Naturalism, naturism :o
;D
Close, put the wrong word into google LOL
Philosophical naturism... that'd almost be worth looking into, if only for the giggles :)
O.
Philosphical naturism - is that a desription of contemplating your navel?
-
.... er, Jeremy, isn't it against forum rules to have the name of a forum member in the title of a thread? Or for that matter to have a thread about a forum member.
C'mon, Jeremy..... you're losing your grip. ;)
Ah, well, at least our Vlad's gettin' to ya....
Sorry, I'm in a mischievious mood! :D
-
.... er, Jeremy, isn't it against forum rules to have the name of a forum member in the title of a thread? Or for that matter to have a thread about a forum member.
C'mon, Jeremy..... you're losing your grip. ;)
Ah, well, at least our Vlad's gettin' to ya....
Sorry, I'm in a mischievious mood! :D
Moderator:
It isn't against the rules, and would only be an issue if it became excessively fractious, when it would be locked or moved.
Since the gist of the thread is about the frequent use of 'Philosophical Naturalism' across multiple threads then we've let it run - for now anyway!
Gordon
-
I quite like vlads persistence, but this did make me laugh Jeremy. :)
-
.... er, Jeremy, isn't it against forum rules to have the name of a forum member in the title of a thread? Or for that matter to have a thread about a forum member.
C'mon, Jeremy..... you're losing your grip. ;)
Ah, well, at least our Vlad's gettin' to ya....
Sorry, I'm in a mischievious mood! :D
Moderator:
It isn't against the rules, and would only be an issue if it became excessively fractious, when it would be locked or moved.
Since the gist of the thread is about the frequent use of 'Philosophical Naturalism' across multiple threads then we've let it run - for now anyway!
Gordon
Gordon, have the rules been changed? I'm sure at one time you couldn't run a thread aimed at another member.
-
.... er, Jeremy, isn't it against forum rules to have the name of a forum member in the title of a thread? Or for that matter to have a thread about a forum member.
C'mon, Jeremy..... you're losing your grip. ;)
Ah, well, at least our Vlad's gettin' to ya....
Sorry, I'm in a mischievious mood! :D
Moderator:
It isn't against the rules, and would only be an issue if it became excessively fractious, when it would be locked or moved.
Since the gist of the thread is about the frequent use of 'Philosophical Naturalism' across multiple threads then we've let it run - for now anyway!
Gordon
Gordon, have the rules been changed? I'm sure at one time you couldn't run a thread aimed at another member.
Moderator:
The current Forum Rules have been in place for 2 years now.
Prior to that there were some loose rules, for want of a better term, but they weren't clearly defined, which is why the current rules were developed and implemented. I think that there was a feeling, at best, that you couldn't use names in thread titles.
This wasn't included in the current Rules, especially since at around the same time we extended the use of the 'Prayer' Board to include 'Thoughts and Announcements' where this could be name-specific. However, if a thread title involving a name was clearly intended to insult or demean (e.g. contravene one of the Rules) then it wouldn't be allowed.
This thread does have a point beyond the use of a member's name, as I said earlier, which is Vlad's use of a term that has figured in his posts in numerous threads and in subsequent exchanges with other members. As such, we haven't intervened to close down the thread because, so far anyway, we have no reason to do so (although I have Modded one post).
-
I like Vlad's persistence too - this place is for sharing opinions, and Vlad's opinions are not offensive - bearing in mind it is a choice to take offence.
-
It's a free forum. As I'm told, "if you don't like what's being said, go. You don't have to read it or answer it." Hypocrites! And, as usual, foul-mouthed with it.
And as usual you take no fucking notice of what you are being fucking told and are still fucking here you annoying - Moderator: content removed. . . . little insect (text substitued for Moderated conent)
No, I am not chucking my toys out of the pram or losing my rag, I am just expressing the depth of my disappointment that you are still here and unable to take you own advice.
Come on old son, your nastiness gives pagans a bad name.
-
.... er, Jeremy, isn't it against forum rules to have the name of a forum member in the title of a thread? Or for that matter to have a thread about a forum member.
C'mon, Jeremy..... you're losing your grip. ;)
Ah, well, at least our Vlad's gettin' to ya....
Sorry, I'm in a mischievious mood! :D
Moderator:
It isn't against the rules, and would only be an issue if it became excessively fractious, when it would be locked or moved.
Since the gist of the thread is about the frequent use of 'Philosophical Naturalism' across multiple threads then we've let it run - for now anyway!
Gordon
Gordon, have the rules been changed? I'm sure at one time you couldn't run a thread aimed at another member.
Moderator:
The current Forum Rules have been in place for 2 years now.
Prior to that there were some loose rules, for want of a better term, but they weren't clearly defined, which is why the current rules were developed and implemented. I think that there was a feeling, at best, that you couldn't use names in thread titles.
This wasn't included in the current Rules, especially since at around the same time we extended the use of the 'Prayer' Board to include 'Thoughts and Announcements' where this could be name-specific. However, if a thread title involving a name was clearly intended to insult or demean (e.g. contravene one of the Rules) then it wouldn't be allowed.
This thread does have a point beyond the use of a member's name, as I said earlier, which is Vlad's use of a term that has figured in his posts in numerous threads and in subsequent exchanges with other members. As such, we haven't intervened to close down the thread because, so far anyway, we have no reason to do so (although I have Modded one post).
Thanks for being clear on that point, Gordon.
-
I like Vlad's persistence too - this place is for sharing opinions, and Vlad's opinions are not offensive - bearing in mind it is a choice to take offence.
Yes, I don't mind Vlad's persistence. Their are other posters, too, that can be just as persistent about certain things.
-
I have no problem with Vlad being persistent, just an issue with when he lies persistently about what people have said
-
NS got there before me, but yes: "persistent" is fine; "persistently dishonest" is not.
-
It's a free forum. As I'm told, "if you don't like what's being said, go. You don't have to read it or answer it." Hypocrites! And, as usual, foul-mouthed with it.
And as usual you take no fucking notice of what you are being fucking told and are still fucking here you annoying - Moderator: content removed. . . . little insect (text substitued for Moderated conent)
No, I am not chucking my toys out of the pram or losing my rag, I am just expressing the depth of my disappointment that you are still here and unable to take you own advice.
Come on old son, your nastiness gives pagans a bad name.
As far as the Christians are concerned I could not possibly make it any worse than they already consider it. When it come to the opinions of Christians on Pagans and Paganism I treat those opinions with the same contempt as they treat my beliefs. Tit-for-tat sort of thing.
-
jeremy,
Couldn't you have sent that as a pm to Vlad instead of having your tantrum out in the open? Thanks for the laugh though.
-
I must admit, it made me laugh too!
-
It's a free forum. As I'm told, "if you don't like what's being said, go. You don't have to read it or answer it." Hypocrites! And, as usual, foul-mouthed with it.
Yes, Vlad is perfectly at liberty to say what he wants but he brings up "philosophical naturalism" as his argument all the bloody time. He tries to derail perfectly good threads with it.
By the same token, I'm allowed to ask him to shut the fuck up about it. I don't expect him to take heed because he doesn't have anything more insightful to say.
-
.... er, Jeremy, isn't it against forum rules to have the name of a forum member in the title of a thread?
Which forum member is called Vlad the Interminable?
Or for that matter to have a thread about a forum member.
It's not about anyone. It's a request for a certain forum member to shut the fuck up about philosophical naturalism
Ah, well, at least our Vlad's gettin' to ya....
If getting irritated about a member's inability to write reasonable posts and therefore parrot the same nonsense on every thread is "getting to me" I hold my hand up.
-
....
.... er, Jeremy, isn't it against forum rules to have the name of a forum member in the title of a thread?
Which forum member is called Vlad the Interminable?
Or for that matter to have a thread about a forum member.
It's not about anyone. It's a request for a certain forum member to shut the fuck up about philosophical naturalism
Ah, well, at least our Vlad's gettin' to ya....
If getting irritated about a member's inability to write reasonable posts and therefore parrot the same nonsense on every thread is "getting to me" I hold my hand up.
The trouble is, of course, that "getting [you] irritated", and not just you but quite few others as well, is the sole motivation for the WUM and the troll to post here.
A post from the old Beeb, an unofficxal rule of the Pagan Topic:
DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS!!
It makes them think that you like them - just like when you feed a dog.
-
.... er, Jeremy, isn't it against forum rules to have the name of a forum member in the title of a thread? Or for that matter to have a thread about a forum member.
C'mon, Jeremy..... you're losing your grip. ;)
Ah, well, at least our Vlad's gettin' to ya....
Sorry, I'm in a mischievious mood! :D
Moderator:
It isn't against the rules, and would only be an issue if it became excessively fractious, when it would be locked or moved.
Since the gist of the thread is about the frequent use of 'Philosophical Naturalism' across multiple threads then we've let it run - for now anyway!
Gordon
I understand Gordon. You feel the antitheists here don't like having a label since you feel it is your jobs to label others.....and so you thought you needed somebody with gravitas ( i.e. Jeremy P)to make one last intellectual appeal( i.e. ''shut the fuck up'' )to get me to desist naming where most of your argument comes from.
-
........ er, Jeremy, isn't it against forum rules to have the name of a forum member in the title of a thread?
Which forum member is called Vlad the Interminable?
Or for that matter to have a thread about a forum member.
It's not about anyone. It's a request for a certain forum member to shut the fuck up about philosophical naturalism
Ah, well, at least our Vlad's gettin' to ya....
If getting irritated about a member's inability to write reasonable posts and therefore parrot the same nonsense on every thread is "getting to me" I hold my hand up.
The trouble is, of course, that "getting [you] irritated", and not just you but quite few others as well, is the sole motivation for the WUM and the troll to post here.
A post from the old Beeb, an unofficxal rule of the Pagan Topic:
DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS!!
It makes them think that you like them - just like when you feed a dog.
Yes I see which definition of troll you are using here.........anyone who disagrees with you.
-
........ er, Jeremy, isn't it against forum rules to have the name of a forum member in the title of a thread?
Which forum member is called Vlad the Interminable?
Or for that matter to have a thread about a forum member.
It's not about anyone. It's a request for a certain forum member to shut the fuck up about philosophical naturalism
Ah, well, at least our Vlad's gettin' to ya....
If getting irritated about a member's inability to write reasonable posts and therefore parrot the same nonsense on every thread is "getting to me" I hold my hand up.
The trouble is, of course, that "getting [you] irritated", and not just you but quite few others as well, is the sole motivation for the WUM and the troll to post here.
A post from the old Beeb, an unofficxal rule of the Pagan Topic:
DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS!!
It makes them think that you like them - just like when you feed a dog.
Yes I see which definition of troll you are using here.........anyone who disagrees with you.
Again you show your monumental ignorance - my definition of a troll and a WUM is someone - like you - who makes stupid, fascile, and irrelevant one line comments that add nothing to a thread or that have no other purpose but to make the poster think that he/she is clever! In your case, as has been posted before your interminable creation of nonsense words ending in -ism.00
In matters of religion I have no problem, unlike many others, including your most veherment supporters, with people who disgaree with me, religion being a matter of personal belief and having no solid foundation in fact, a matter of faith only. What I do not like is when in place of reasonable discussion of my beliefs the detractors do nothing except take the piss, yet piss their pants in anger if the same is done to their beliefs.
-
........ er, Jeremy, isn't it against forum rules to have the name of a forum member in the title of a thread?
Which forum member is called Vlad the Interminable?
Or for that matter to have a thread about a forum member.
It's not about anyone. It's a request for a certain forum member to shut the fuck up about philosophical naturalism
Ah, well, at least our Vlad's gettin' to ya....
If getting irritated about a member's inability to write reasonable posts and therefore parrot the same nonsense on every thread is "getting to me" I hold my hand up.
The trouble is, of course, that "getting [you] irritated", and not just you but quite few others as well, is the sole motivation for the WUM and the troll to post here.
A post from the old Beeb, an unofficxal rule of the Pagan Topic:
DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS!!
It makes them think that you like them - just like when you feed a dog.
Yes I see which definition of troll you are using here.........anyone who disagrees with you.
Again you show your monumental ignorance - my definition of a troll and a WUM is someone - like you - who makes stupid, fascile, and irrelevant one line comments that add nothing to a thread or that have no other purpose but to make the poster think that he/she is clever!
That definition covers most of us who post on this forum.
-
........ er, Jeremy, isn't it against forum rules to have the name of a forum member in the title of a thread?
Which forum member is called Vlad the Interminable?
Or for that matter to have a thread about a forum member.
It's not about anyone. It's a request for a certain forum member to shut the fuck up about philosophical naturalism
Ah, well, at least our Vlad's gettin' to ya....
If getting irritated about a member's inability to write reasonable posts and therefore parrot the same nonsense on every thread is "getting to me" I hold my hand up.
The trouble is, of course, that "getting [you] irritated", and not just you but quite few others as well, is the sole motivation for the WUM and the troll to post here.
A post from the old Beeb, an unofficxal rule of the Pagan Topic:
DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS!!
It makes them think that you like them - just like when you feed a dog.
Yes I see which definition of troll you are using here.........anyone who disagrees with you.
Again you show your monumental ignorance - my definition of a troll and a WUM is someone - like you - who makes stupid, fascile, and irrelevant one line comments that add nothing to a thread or that have no other purpose but to make the poster think that he/she is clever!
That definition covers most of us who post on this forum.
Gabriella
You do yourself a great diservice with your comment. You are one of those who, rarely, except in the instance immediately above, posts one-liners. Whilst I, for one, disagree with an awful lot of what you post it is always intelligent, intelligible, and worth reading, quite unlike dozens of single lines referring to philosophical naturalism.
-
CMG, there's many a thread that goes off topic.
Some here are masters at NLP though.
-
HEY VLAD, since jeremy brought it up, could you tell us your thoughts on philosophical naturalism, I neglected to read those posts Jeremy is having a tantrum about? Thanks.
Good grief dearest of the dearest matty. You are so full of BS. You really need to practise what you are lecturing us about if you want anybody to take your pathetic little sermonettes seriously. Too funny you! Now go get your freak on!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VxJzT3MVNeM
-
JC,
HEY VLAD, since jeremy brought it up, could you tell us your thoughts on philosophical naturalism, I neglected to read those posts Jeremy is having a tantrum about? Thanks.
"thoughts" ?!?!?!?!?!
You'll be a long time waiting ;)
-
And perhaps some are Chucky and Bride of Chucky.
-
HEY VLAD, since jeremy brought it up, could you tell us your thoughts on philosophical naturalism, I neglected to read those posts Jeremy is having a tantrum about? Thanks.
Good grief dearest of the dearest matty. You are so full of BS. You really need to practise what you are lecturing us about if you want anybody to take your pathetic little sermonettes seriously. Too funny you! Now go get your freak on!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VxJzT3MVNeM
Mr C, I shall collect several past postings on the subject and edit them together into what we in Britain call ''The Omnibus edition''... in the meantime all the very best to you.
-
I look forward to your omnibus edition as does jeremy I'm sure. I've never heard of omnibus edition but I do enjoy how furious the socialist and liberal party get's over here with our conservative governments constant omnibus bills. I'm a fan of omnibus!
-
I look forward to your omnibus edition as does jeremy I'm sure. I've never heard of omnibus edition but I do enjoy how furious the socialist and liberal party get's over here with our conservative governments constant omnibus bills. I'm a fan of omnibus!
I wouldn't mind if he kept his posting about philosophical naturalism to one, or perhaps a few, threads. But he uses it everywhere like a talisman against having to think.
-
I look forward to your omnibus edition as does jeremy I'm sure. I've never heard of omnibus edition but I do enjoy how furious the socialist and liberal party get's over here with our conservative governments constant omnibus bills. I'm a fan of omnibus!
I wouldn't mind if he kept his posting about philosophical naturalism to one, or perhaps a few, threads. But he uses it everywhere like a talisman against having to think.
That would be possible if it wasn't the basis of perhaps 95% of atheist argument.....but then you guys keep right on doing Philosophical Naturalism.
-
.... er, Jeremy, isn't it against forum rules to have the name of a forum member in the title of a thread? Or for that matter to have a thread about a forum member.
C'mon, Jeremy..... you're losing your grip. ;)
Ah, well, at least our Vlad's gettin' to ya....
Sorry, I'm in a mischievious mood! :D
Hi Sweet Pea,
You cannot use the real names of forum members on the threads or in the titles...
-
jeremy,
Couldn't you have sent that as a pm to Vlad instead of having your tantrum out in the open? Thanks for the laugh though.
It would not have had the same effect. After all what type of character assassinations would follow from other members by PM?
Did you not see BA also getting insulted.
He knew what he was doing. But as you can see, this thread was not as well thought out or as diplomatic as Vlads thread that Jeremyp wrote this in reply to.
(You can't beat a bit of bully-ing) what a pity it started in the first instance. :(
-
I look forward to your omnibus edition as does jeremy I'm sure. I've never heard of omnibus edition but I do enjoy how furious the socialist and liberal party get's over here with our conservative governments constant omnibus bills. I'm a fan of omnibus!
I wouldn't mind if he kept his posting about philosophical naturalism to one, or perhaps a few, threads. But he uses it everywhere like a talisman against having to think.
That would be possible if it wasn't the basis of perhaps 95% of atheist argument
It's not the basis of any arguments on this board except yours.
-
I look forward to your omnibus edition as does jeremy I'm sure. I've never heard of omnibus edition but I do enjoy how furious the socialist and liberal party get's over here with our conservative governments constant omnibus bills. I'm a fan of omnibus!
I wouldn't mind if he kept his posting about philosophical naturalism to one, or perhaps a few, threads. But he uses it everywhere like a talisman against having to think.
That would be possible if it wasn't the basis of perhaps 95% of atheist argument
It's not the basis of any arguments on this board except yours.
That's just hyperbole and nonsense Jeremy....and you know it is.
-
It's not the basis of any arguments on this board except yours.
That's just hyperbole and nonsense Jeremy....and you know it is.
What is your understanding of the meaning of the word "hyperbole"? I can't see any way for its normal meaning to make any sense given the comment you are responding to.
-
Vladdy Straw Boy,
''The Omnibus edition''...
Say what now? Oh my giddy Aunt, you’re actually going to reply to something? In an “Omnibus edition” no less? Shoud we call it your Vladendium maybe?
After all these years of being chased for an answer to any question at all that doesn’t consist of your standard repertoire of distortion, evasion, abuse etc you’re actually going to reply to something?!?!?!?
Really?
Really really?
Have the clocks struck half past thirteen?
Have the ravens left the Tower of London?
Wow! I feel a bit faint.
OK, this’ll need some careful planning – after the avalanche of unanswered questions it’ll be a large volume after all. I suggest an alphabetical approach to the chapters – from “A” for “At last Vladdy Stops Ducking and Diving” to “Z” for “Zeitgeist”, stopping along the way of course for “N” for “Nun Sekwiture” (suggest you use the spell check here).
Now then, the biggest section presumably will be, “How I finally laid out a logical path from whateverpopsintomyheadisafactforyoutoo-ism to some kind or method or process to show your working without recourse to your irrelevant and misunderstood use of “philosophical naturalism”. You'll have your work cut out for that one so take it slowly, maybe wrap a few cold towels round your head first if that helps.
Can’t wait!
Oh, hang on though – what’s this again?
I shall collect several past postings on the subject and edit them together…
Aw no! Say it ain’t so Vladdy boy! Not that, surely not that?
See, we both know that your “past postings” consist entirely of no method of any kind, the irrelevant and misunderstood use of “philosophical naturalism”, straw men, ad hominems and personal abuse.
And that’s all you intend to compile into the Vladendium?
No coherent argument?
No robust logic?
No addressing why your belief in a god is any more a fact for me than my belief in Stan the Stork is a fact for you?
Nothing?
Zip?
Zilch?
The humanity! I need a lie down…
-
Vladdy Straw Boy,
That would be possible if it wasn't the basis of perhaps 95% of atheist argument.....but then you guys keep right on doing Philosophical Naturalism.
It's the basis of 0% of "atheist argument", for reasons that have been explained to you exhaustively.
-
Vladdy Straw Boy,
''The Omnibus edition''...
Say what now? Oh my giddy Aunt, you’re actually going to reply to something? In an “Omnibus edition” no less? Shoud we call it your Vladendium maybe?
Only if we can call yours the Deadendium.
-
Vladdy Straw Boy,
That would be possible if it wasn't the basis of perhaps 95% of atheist argument.....but then you guys keep right on doing Philosophical Naturalism.
It's the basis of 0% of "atheist argument", for reasons that have been explained to you exhaustively.
If you are saying therefore that all of atheist argument has no philosophical basis and is plucked from the arse, then temperamentally I sympathise with your claim.
However honesty compels us to call a spade a spade and you and your wee servile wizards ''Philosophical Naturalists''.
-
Vlady Straw Boy,
If you are saying therefore that all of atheist argument has no philosophical basis and is plucked from the arse, then temperamentally I sympathise with your claim.
However honesty compels us to call a spade a spade and you and your wee servile wizards ''Philosophical Naturalists''.
Just had a call from the British Grass Growing and Hay Baling Association. They're working flat out to meet your straw orders but there's just not enough available. Emergency supplies are on their way from Canada apparently, but in the meantime they ask would you mind dialling back to a nominal half dozen or so straw men a day please.
Sorry to inconvenience you - as soon as the ship docks you can ramp back up to your usual quota.
Ta everso.
-
Vladdy Straw Boy,
Only if we can call yours the Deadendium.
Aw bless. What's your plan for today then - collect a few conkers, then lashings of chicken nuggets and trifle for tea, and into your jim-jams and bed by 7?