'Xian' - what's all that about then?

[six45ive]

No problem. Would you say reason, logic, knowledge (i.e. things that constitute 'rational'), are properties of the world?

 

They are labels we give to clearly defined explanations of how we make sense of the world in a practical way brought about by our evolved use of language over many millenia.

[Grahame]

Why do you link to neo-nazi websites then, containing filth about muslims?

 

You are as much a poor advert for Christians as the atheists here are poor adverts for atheism.

 

You cite muslim-hating websites and the atheists post filth about catholics, you're as bad as each other.

 

If we were talking about a different subject I would link to the appropriate site to indicate my source. I also think the Catholic priests were wrong for what they did.

[sccsux]

I also think the Catholic priests were wrong for what they did.

 

So why did you try and forge a link to homosexuality on the threads about it?

[Wildcat]

I'm sure you've read that on some philosophy paper out there but it's simply wrong. You don't have a certain type of approach to knowledge that somehow attempts to give revelation some justification, in this case that would, as you say, be a metaphysical approach.

You simply have knowledge or you don't it's as simple as that and if you have it it has to be demonstrated in a way that's shown to be real and true for that knowledge to count.

What would be more accurate would be for you to say; 'Revelation is a metaphysical approach to belief.'

 

So why don't you enlighten me about your understanding of metaphysics because every example I can find reinforces my view that it's meaningless, pretentious nonsense that's completely unnecessary in a rational world.

 

PS. I seem to recall you had a fairly half hearted attempt at trying to justify the unjustifiable (regarding metaphysics) in the disproving god thread but disappeared after fj tore your feeble arguments apart.

 

There is no one answer but the form an answer would take would be like this, or

or this.

 

You won't find a literal answer to the metaphysical, you can only find answers through metaphors, through art and through self knowledge.

[Waldo]

They are labels we give to clearly defined explanations of how we make sense of the world in a practical way brought about by our evolved use of language over many millenia.

 

Still trying to understand, what actually is a 'rational world'?

 

I would have thought the world itself, incapable of being rational. Do you think the phrase is more a descriptor of human mental processes? Rather than being a descriptor of the world?

[Joe_K]

Not wishing to wade through more than the first page of this, what 'Xian' is about, as others have said, is a perfectly innocuous abreviation sanctioned by Christianity itself. This harks back to the 'death of a troll' thread, i.e. if someone wants to be offended (or rather, perceive offence being intended), they will.

 

I've actually seen people objecting to 'Xmas', as some kind of tacky new fashion. And as it happens, someone is complaining on the Radio 4 message boards, in a thread about Desert Island Discs, about 'The Bible' being referred to without capitalisation. He argues on the grounds of grammar and proper nouns, but one suspects that if someone had typed 'kirsty young', he wouldn't have been quite so fastidious. I don't capitalise the bible because that would imply a significance which I don't ascribe to it, but I'm not out to offend Christians (or christians) either.

 

If someone is in the habit of using 'Xian' in typed conversation, he or she will probably give other, more concrete clues of their feelings about the religion, than mere abbreviation.

[Waldo]

i.e. if someone wants to be offended (or rather, perceive offence being intended), they will.

 

There's a lot of truth in that; it's up to the individual, ultimately, if they choose to take offense.

 

Also, taking offense, pre-supposes that the person who offers the offense, is significant.

 

Although, does the mere fact that we are posting on this thread, not indicate that we do care to some degree, how other people percieve us?

[Waldo]

I don't capitalise the bible because that would imply a significance which I don't ascribe to it, but I'm not out to offend Christians (or christians) either.

 

Is the fact that you make a point of not capitalising the bible, in fact, lending significance to it? If it wasn't significant, you wouldn't pay it a second thought, and would perhaps use the default setting (i.e. common use).

 

Does that make sense?

[Alien]

There's a lot of truth in that; it's up to the individual, ultimately, if they choose to take offense.

 

Also, taking offense, pre-supposes that the person who offers the offense, is significant.

 

Although, does the mere fact that we are posting on this thread, not indicate that we do care to some degree, how other people percieve us?

 

 

Interesting. It's human nature I suppose to be concerned at how we are perceived..as you said why make the effort if you're not. If you are aware and importantly concerned, then the only conclusion would be empathy for others. If you are devoid of empathy then my own conclusion would be that nothing is as important as ones own self centeredness. If you can't understand the point someone is trying to get across however alien those points are, you should still empathise with the person, rather than the point, if only due to the fact of your own frustration in them not understanding you as a person. Basically we may not think alike but as humans we are VERY much alike.

 

I think.

[Grahame]

So why did you try and forge a link to homosexuality on the threads about it?

 

Men having sex with boys, its a bit obvious.