Sriram,
I am sorry guys but there is nothing for me to demonstrate or provide evidence for. I have nothing more to say than what I have already said multiple times here and in my articles that I link. There is no additional information for me to provide.
If you expect your various claims of objective fact about the world to be taken seriously then you have you have everything to demonstrate or to provide evidence for. Until you do all you have is undefined assertions – essentially white noise – no matter how convinced of them you may be.
It is about the way we look at the world. It is about perception. That is not likely to change whatever I may say.
Again, no – it will change if and ever you manage to provide some reasoning or evidence that supports you. Until then there’s no reason for it to change, at least not for thinking people.
The reason I don't take any of your criticisms seriously is because of the 'Zero error' that I ascribe to your view points. The problem is multi fold.
No, the reason is that you cannot or will not engage with the rebuttals that undo you. Take your blind man analogy mistake for example – why not actually deal with it rather than pretend it hasn’t happened?
1. Many of you are in the mental stage of adolescence. (Please refer to my article on 'Three stages' at my blog site). This makes many of you habitual skeptics and cynics....full of 'I know it all' self importance. It is a mindset that cannot change at this stage given that many of you people are fairly old.
Insulting your interlocutors won’t help you. Scepticism is the default position for any thinking person because, without it, any claim about anything would be accepted – “spirituality” and leprechauns alike. That’s why the burden of proof concept matters – if you make a claim you expect to be taken seriously, then it’s your job to explain why anyone should do so. Just asserting some of us to lack the magic properties that you have decided you have to grasp these things just makes you look foolish.
2. Additionally, many of you have a Zoom-In mind set due to your science training and cultural environment. This makes your thinking microscopic....full of reductionist and detailed nitpicking....with no total view at all. This is a problem while discussing philosophy and spirituality.
Which is another of your posts full of mistakes in reasoning. It’s not “microscopic thinking” to reason your way to, say, aerodynamics creating lift rather than angels doing it. Again, insulting those with better reasoning ability than your own does you no credit here.
3. Besides the above two, there is also the 'Two boxes syndrome' because of which many of you have two segregated and a bipolar way of reacting to similar issues. You clearly have bias and prejudice in the way you choose to look at certain phenomena.
“Bipolar” is a medical term, and it’s particularly scummy of you to use it as an insult. There’s only a “bias and prejudice” inasmuch as mindless, content free woo won’t be accepted as true just on someone’s say so. You have the same bias and prejudice in respect of the mindless and content free woo of others, which is why you reject my assertions about, say, leprechauns. If you want to persist with your “two boxes” analogy, then you have to label the first one “reason-based beliefs” and the second “other beliefs”.
4. Some of you believe that merely joining together and badgering someone can bring them around. Not likely! That is bullying, not discussion.
Playing the persecution card won’t help you either. No-one badgers you – rather you’re given clear and cogent explanation when you go wrong, which you then ignore in favour of scattering insults as you make good your escape. This dishonesty does you no credit.
But, having said all this, I still enjoy posting here because it also makes me rethink on certain issues....besides having something to do, of course.
If you claim to “rethink” (or even to think at all for that matter) why not finally show some evidence of it here?
So, keep it going folks.
Cheers.
Sriram
PS: Where is torridon, I wonder?! I could hold a conversation with him without the issue getting derailed or ending in name calling.
Name calling like “Many of you are in the mental stage of adolescence”, “thinking microscopic”, “bipolar” etc you mean?
