What I actualy meant by that question is that the weird or bizzare can certianly be seen. I myself have often been accused of being weird (I can't see it myself) but to be weird is within the realms of human behaviour and so must be considerd normal. I guess weird is really a label for actions or words or mindsets that we do not understand, and so we call them wierd as that somehow validates the fear of the differant and lets us off without the need to examine deeply such action, words or mindsets, perhaps?
On 30 July, 17:51, deripsni <[email protected]> wrote: > I guess you have to ask yourself since to me it is a personal > determination. To me it means bizarre, and if you want me to describe > that, I will have to pass ;-] > > On Jul 30, 12:17 pm, "[email protected]" > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Heh like I always ask what is weird anyway? > > > On 30 July, 17:06, deripsni <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I thought I liked weird, but I'm beginning to reconsider ;-] > > > > On Jul 30, 11:59 am, Lonlaz <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Athiesm, Xtianity, screw it all, join the Church of the Subgenius: > > > > >http://www.subgenius.com/ > > > > > I'm a minister as well. > > > > > On Jul 30, 10:53 am, deripsni <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > From my perspective, belief is anchored in a weak foundation. It can > > > > > be as unstable as the weather and just as stormy. If one doesn't > > > > > believe in what another believes in, it means one of two things, that > > > > > one is right and the other wrong (or vice versa), or both are wrong. > > > > > This does not create harmony and, in the mind of the fanatic, creates > > > > > solid reasons for anger, rebellion and even war. The biased need for > > > > > the adherent that their belief is the right one, is fundamental to > > > > > their emotional stability, and consequently a cause for them to get > > > > > their nickers in a knot if this belief is challenged. > > > > > > On Jul 30, 10:46 am, "[email protected]" > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Hah Chris yes I agree it seems that many of my like mined compatrats > > > > > > get their nickers in a twist and start to loose all concept of > > > > > > reason. Why a belife in a creator God should make this so I don't > > > > > > know, but it is evidant that it does. > > > > > > > On 30 July, 15:21, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > The problem mate is that people use the concept of invisible sky > > > > > > > fairies to > > > > > > > wreak havoc in society, education and government. This, and this > > > > > > > alone, is > > > > > > > why we atheists must organize, and be active. Otherwise, I could > > > > > > > give fook > > > > > > > all, and I'd join a random sky fairy party every month, just for > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > cameraderie. > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 10:01 AM, [email protected] < > > > > > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Yes Ian that does help explain a bit. However it is still not > > > > > > > > clear to > > > > > > > > me the differance in disbelife and absence of belife, which is > > > > > > > > why > > > > > > > > Iasked for a mundane example. > > > > > > > > > Let me try this one out on you then. > > > > > > > > > I'm reading my paper keeping myself to myself on my morning > > > > > > > > commute, > > > > > > > > when I notice a bloke reading over my shoulder, when I turn to > > > > > > > > him he > > > > > > > > brazenly and cheeckily asks me to flip back to the horoscopes > > > > > > > > page so > > > > > > > > he can check out how his day will goe. > > > > > > > > > I laugh and declare that that I do not accpet his claim that the > > > > > > > > movments of other planets and stars has any bearing on how our > > > > > > > > day > > > > > > > > will progress. > > > > > > > > > Do I do so from an absence of belife in horoscopes or from a > > > > > > > > disbelife > > > > > > > > in the concept of them? What in all reality is the differance. > > > > > > > > > Also if no agrument sways me to except the idea of a creator > > > > > > > > God, but > > > > > > > > at the same time I am unwilling to declare that I belive there > > > > > > > > exists > > > > > > > > no such thing, then am I not agnostic? > > > > > > > > > On 30 July, 14:43, Ian Pollard <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Lee, > > > > > > > > > > I'll try my best... > > > > > > > > > > The theist makes a positive assertion about the existence of > > > > > > > > > God. An > > > > > > > > atheist > > > > > > > > > is someone who does not accept the theist's claim; thus they > > > > > > > > > are an > > > > > > > > > "a"-theist. Atheism is therefore only the absence of that > > > > > > > > > theistic > > > > > > > > belief. > > > > > > > > > An atheist does not claim to know that God does not exist, > > > > > > > > > only that the > > > > > > > > > arguments presented in favour, thus far, are insufficient > > > > > > > > > hold such a > > > > > > > > > belief. > > > > > > > > > > Positively asserting that "there is no God" is further than > > > > > > > > > any sensible > > > > > > > > > atheist would go. An "in joke" that demonstrates this very > > > > > > > > > well is the > > > > > > > > > chapter of Richard Dawkin's 'The God Delusion' entitled 'Why > > > > > > > > > There Almost > > > > > > > > > Certainly Is No God'. I could well believe that the nuances > > > > > > > > > of this were > > > > > > > > > lost on some people, but there's no semantic word fuckery > > > > > > > > > going on; this > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > really what atheism is. > > > > > > > > > > What you continually describe, I think, is some form of > > > > > > > > > escalated "strong > > > > > > > > > atheism" or obnoxious forum trolling. I've started to wonder > > > > > > > > > whether this > > > > > > > > > particular kind of atheism only exists on Internet forums to > > > > > > > > > antagonise > > > > > > > > > theists (see Chazwin's posts). In a sensible discussion I > > > > > > > > > don't know any > > > > > > > > > atheist who would support such a position, hence I say your > > > > > > > > > assertions > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > atheism lead you only to a strawman. > > > > > > > > > > Look at the atheists you chat with here Mind's Eye; do I, > > > > > > > > > Chris, Fran, or > > > > > > > > > anyone else, claim "there is no God"? > > > > > > > > > > Ian- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
