Is God All In The Mind?

[Mr Walker]

Just as your wishy-washy excuse, 'when I said I don't lie I just mean nowadays', and pitiful attempt to turn this around as if PA or any of the other 'likers' of his post are being unreasonable tends to confirm my own opinions about your motivations and drivers. Can't just be that you were inconsistent and PA is being entirely logical, no no, that won't do. Considering you seem to be pathologically allergic to providing evidence for your claims, unfortunately what you say and whether you are being consistent/honest (I don't think you are being 'dishonest' per se, I just think you can't keep straight all your statements about how great you are) is of more importance as it is all there is to go on.

It's not attacking your 'character', it's attacking the arguments and statements you've made. You could just own up to it you know and say you were misunderstood, PA has simply taken your statements and noted the inconsistency. I 'liked' it because I had hoped that pointing out a basic clear inconsistency might wake you up to the fact that you are not as perfect as you 'KNOW' yourself to be, so that maybe you'd come down to the field and join in the game instead of restating over and over the definitions of 'knowledge' and 'belief'; believe it or not, most people here already understand those terms. But the problems with your 'argument' have been covered so many times its not likely you are ever going to get it unfortunately.

I stand by what I said, being what was factually correct, and all that I meant. I DO NOT lie, and I have not lied on UM (I have NEVER said that I was always truthful in my younger days) Your opinions are formed within your own mind from its own world view and biases. They are not an accurate representation of me or my nature and character. That's your problem/error, not mine. Your language is intensely emotive and biased. There IS no inconsistency in the facts. Just a perceived one where PA has jumped to an inaccurate perception about. Thus my perfection remains untainted.

[Mr Walker]

I know you responded to several of the points I raised, but there's really only one that I feel obliged to answer, and that is this one here. The fact of the matter is that you have set yourself up on a pedestal. You don't lie, you always tell the truth, you are an honest person. Your honesty has literally been brought up by you as a compelling reason to trust your statements. You said it yourself, one lie can ruin your credibility. So by your own words be ye damned, your credibility is lost.

I also like what LG wrote, that it was hoped that such a comment would help jolt you out from the pedestal you've built for yourself, that maybe you aren't the perfectly amazing Mr Walker that you present to the forums every single day, but just a fallible guy with fallible understanding of the world you live in.

But from a purely carnal perspective, I do admit a minor level of maliciousness (perhaps even malicious glee) in posting what I did. You have been setting yourself up as the perfect "I can do no wrong" poster for the better part of two years now, perhaps a bit longer (you didn't start at UM with such an arrogant perception of yourself, I don't know what changed between your early years and current post style) and bringing you back to earth did give me some small satisfaction. Of course, you turned it around and made it out as if I was in the wrong for pointing out your lie. But do you expect any different? Post after post declaring your honesty, saying that you learned this from your parents (I won't clutter with posts, but a quick search of your username and the key words "parents, never, lie" indicate that you attribute your choice to be truthful to the way your parents brought you up), you shouldn't be surprised one whit by the direction this thread has taken.

That would be correct if you were correct and had got your understanding correct "I DO NOT LIE" is a present tense statement saying that i do not lie. " I have not lied on UM speaks for itself .My post was about something which happened in 1972/3. Until that time, while brought up to be moral and honest I didnt have the highly internalised need for honesty which I have now. I lied to keep people happy and avoid confrontation etc.

Thank for your honesty I believe this is reflected in other people's responses as well.

You have misconstrued (I believe ) two different things I was brought up to be moral and truthful and generaly was A "good' human being, but until I became more aware of my relationship to god I saw this differently. Even now I am a work in progress. I am not complete or perfect yet but stll working on it.

[+Sherapy]

I stand by what I said, being what was factually correct, and all that I meant. I DO NOT lie, and I have not lied on UM (I have NEVER said that I was always truthful in my younger days) Your opinions are formed within your own mind from its own world view and biases. They are not an accurate representation of me or my nature and character. That's your problem/error, not mine. Your language is intensely emotive and biased. There IS no inconsistency in the facts. Just a perceived one where PA has jumped to an inaccurate perception about. Thus my perfection remains untainted.

MW, LQ has formed his opinion of you based on your posts, and an exchange of posts between you two. He is a clear, concise, incredibly articulate young man, who goes to great lengths to be fair, to consider all views and when he is in error, he has demonstrated the integrity/maturity to self correct. He is a respected poster on UM and I for one do think he is consistent in his assessments of your posts. In the end, You are responsible for the example you set, if you do not like the feedback, you always have the option/ power to change your behavior, LQ's experience of you is just as viable and real and worthy of being heard. IMO

Edited June 12, 2015 by Sherapy

[Arbenol]

No I live in a small community of 1500 people with another 1500 in the rural district serving it. I can leave my keys in my car and leave my house door open and be completely safe,

Hold on a moment. Didn't you say that crime was now so bad that everyone locks theirs doors.

Hang on - here it is.

I've lived in the same community all my life So How come today people keep there doors locked (or as happened with my elderly mother people come into their house while they are there and steal their possessions How come no one leaves their doors open any more

Sorry to jump on the bandwagon (really, I am) but you do have a blindspot to your own inconsistencies.

YES you are correct in a cack handed way

Ha ha!!!

That's brilliant. I want it for my epitaph:

"HE WAS RIGHT - IN A CACK-HANDED SORT OF WAY"

Sorry, but the rest of your post was completely irrelevant. Actually, all of it was.

So, back to evidence. How about this weekend's lottery numbers?

[+Sherapy]

Hold on a moment. Didn't you say that crime was now so bad that everyone locks theirs doors.

Hang on - here it is.

Sorry to jump on the bandwagon (really, I am) but you do have a blindspot to your own inconsistencies.

Ha ha!!!

That's brilliant. I want it for my epitaph:

"HE WAS RIGHT - IN A CACK-HANDED SORT OF WAY"

Sorry, but the rest of your post was completely irrelevant. Actually, all of it was.

So, back to evidence. How about this weekend's lottery numbers?

Especially when MW claims a photographic memory:

"I have a "photographic memory" which enables me to remember hundreds of pages verbatim temporarily, and many facts for decades. I can read a page as fast as i can turn it, because the words on the page go straight into my mind, as fast as i can see them, and i taught myself to look at a whole page, rather than a word or even a line at a time, but i cant see pictures images etc."

[Mr Walker]

MW, LQ has formed his opinion of you based on your posts, and an exchange of posts between you two. He is a clear, concise, incredibly articulate young man, who goes to great lengths to be fair, to consider all views and when he is in error, he has demonstrated the integrity/maturity to self correct. He is a respected poster on UM and I for one do think he is consistent in his assessments of your posts. In the end, You are responsible for the example you set, if you do not like the feedback, you always have the option/ power to change your behavior, LQ's experience of you is just as viable and real and worthy of being heard. IMO

The reverse of your conclusion is actually true LQ has formed an opinion based on PREVIOUS beliefs world views and opinions We ALL do this and it is hard not to operate in this way. He reads my posts through a preconceived conceptual reality. One can tell this about many posters in the way they don't actually read what I post but read and respond to what they THINK/BELIVE I am saying (and not just my posts but any post they disagree with) I respect all posters on UM as human beings but not all ideas and concepts. ( I really am not clear on LQs own world view and I pass no judgement on it.) Being, likeable, by the way is not as desirable in my opinion as being right. Being likeable serves no useful purpose.

[Mr Walker]

MW, the point is (that you are ignoring) is you have staked many posts on the fact that you have never lied, would never lie, and I too have read countless times, how your parents instilled this in you, and you live by it.

Why are you disappointed in Pa and the other posters who liked his post? I do not conclude that PA is attacking your character, he is demonstrating, using your own words that-- who you claim to be and who your posts show you to be--do not match up.

You have offered yourself as the evidence for your God claim, post after post after post. This is on you.

Constantly in return, you have offered ad hoc adjustments, this post is no exception. As LQ pointed out this is a pattern of yours.

You said you saw a light on the lawn, when your parents asked what it was you said it was the lights from a truck.

I personally have asked you on many occasions how did a light that you observed, become an entity, or an angel, or a God (You have even tried to use your dog as an eye eyewitness).

To me, you are not credible beyond, you observed a light; (visual),your witnesses were told it was from a truck. Everything else seems to just be you, funding your beliefs with the experiences--to date you have not provided reliable data for your God claims

In taking your position on experiential data, you claim it is the beginning and end all to logic. You insist there is absolutely nothing else to consider, therefore you show you do not account for anything else.

To me, this demonstrates: bias, unnoticed and uncontrolled for variables, it shows lack of due care, and lack of expertise in logic ( something you claim you have implicitly, in fact you claim you are on par with the greatest minds in the world based on a personality test online). I work with kids in honors Geometry and specifically our curriculum teaches the basics of logic, and you do not demonstrate a basic understanding, you seem to be all over the place. Similar to one who google searches the data, but hasn't incorporated the model in real time. If you are really a teacher, then you understand you show what you know. teachers grade on this ability.

When we process input we use memory, we use association ( pattern discernment and recognition) and reason. When we generate input we use experience, intuition, experimentation, and invention. Experience plays a part, acts as the bridge from inside our head to what is outside our head, when using an expereince exclusively we look to all the senses involved.

You offered visual, you saw a light. That is your one fact, the rest is assuming a lot of other facts, not in evidence, so this makes your God claim incredibly unstable.

I liked PA's post and LQ because your capacity for self correction, honor, and integrity needs a lot of work, and I think as hard as it can be to hear constructive criticism, there are a lot of caring people on UM, that have offered the kind of feedback that you need, now it is up to you. All the best to you.

.

You see. AGAIN You mis read and then misrepresent what I have posted, I have NEVER claimed to have never to have lied, and in many posts have told stories of my youth, in which I lied. Somehow you have in your mind a distorted perception of what I have claimed. I can see you in 5 years time still saying "but MW claimed he never lied and PA proved him wrong . " Both parts of which statement remain factually false. It is you constructing some concept of me which doesn't exist. We've been over the rest ad infinitum and I have nothing to add. Your mind disclosed to everything you don't believe in. When a person calls you a liar he is attacking your character and probity. What concerns me is that this is the old game, where failing to make progress in factual/logical argument, a poster attacks the person's character /probity in order to discredit their content.

[Mr Walker]

Hold on a moment. Didn't you say that crime was now so bad that everyone locks theirs doors.

Hang on - here it is.

Sorry to jump on the bandwagon (really, I am) but you do have a blindspot to your own inconsistencies.

Ha ha!!!

That's brilliant. I want it for my epitaph:

"HE WAS RIGHT - IN A CACK-HANDED SORT OF WAY"

Sorry, but the rest of your post was completely irrelevant. Actually, all of it was.

So, back to evidence. How about this weekend's lottery numbers?

Either my poor punctuation or two separate comments. I live in a small community where people don't lock their doors. This contrasts with my mother who lives in a big town small city with considerable indigenous tensions. When I lived there as a chid it was like the town I now live in but today it is unsafe to walk the streets, and the elderly are robbed while they are a t home. I think my comment alluded to the changing nature of society within a generation or two.

[Stubbly_Dooright]

Especially when MW claims a photographic memory:

"I have a "photographic memory" which enables me to remember hundreds of pages verbatim temporarily, and many facts for decades. I can read a page as fast as i can turn it, because the words on the page go straight into my mind, as fast as i can see them, and i taught myself to look at a whole page, rather than a word or even a line at a time, but i cant see pictures images etc."

I always wondered what the brain can hold, and how years of what ever does to it. Brain cells died due to alcohol consumption, (so I heard, I guess) concussions, (that would be me) and other things. Sometimes it takes certain things to jog my memory. I love jewelry and I will forget a face, (come on it's retail, one face blends into another) but that necklace,................... oh yeah, 'you bought these books, and we talked about that amusement park'. I don't think we all have a hand on how we have such a memory.

[Mr Walker]

Especially when MW claims a photographic memory:

"I have a "photographic memory" which enables me to remember hundreds of pages verbatim temporarily, and many facts for decades. I can read a page as fast as i can turn it, because the words on the page go straight into my mind, as fast as i can see them, and i taught myself to look at a whole page, rather than a word or even a line at a time, but i cant see pictures images etc."

I Do have a photographic memory, although I have to concentrate more to use it these days. I Just explained that arbenol was interpreting a comment I made which had nothing to do with the town I live in today but to society in general and to the city where my mother has lived all hER life. Perhaps my sentence structure was faulty but I think it more likely that he grabbed a comment which SEEMED to apply to me today, and what I just said about the community I live in now, but did not.

Rreading the comment as it stands alone I can see how it could be misunderstood..

Edited June 12, 2015 by Mr Walker

[Stubbly_Dooright]

And MW, can know for himself, from each of us why we have issue, this way he isn't left to assume things, that then grow into resentments. So far, no one has said they have issue that he beleives in an entity.

You're right. And that is why I ignore his posts. I don't want to have an issue, and I go on to others, who have in what I believe, something relevant to say. When others here, like I said, admit that they were wrong and thank for being corrected, I pay attention to them. I guess, being in retail, I have found some individuals to be 'closed off' from reality and not see how 'so into themselves' and 'thinking of self-omnipotency' they are. No matter how one can try to point it out to them, it wont work. Sometimes, when someone says something so incredible, I'm like, 'ok, see you later' and walk away with a rolleyes. I often think to myself of the reality of such people around, but such is life. Fortunately, I also walk and talk to people who have such wisdom and such, that I'm in shock in their existence. Kind of like Jon Stewart reaction to Malala on the 'Daily Show'. Fortunately I see this here too. *looks in Sheri's direction*

My sister used to lie for attention, she used to make up outlandish stories to compensate for her horrible self image, the reasons her esteem was so poor was of her own doing, she was making choices that led to behaviors that harmed others, and in turn this fractured her relationships with them and left her feeling like crap about herself.

For years, she seemed to demonstrate no capacity for remorse or self accountability. It was never her, it as always the other.

I will be honest. I often feel, and probably it's true, that this was me, (probably still me) but there are some who then ask, 'why is it always about you?' I never lied (ok, being honest here, maybe I mostly not lied ) about a lot, ( I do feel lies come back to haunt you, and I can't do it well either) but a lot I use to try to 'explain away' my actions and words that I have said. (probably why I can 'recognize them' )

I still feel like crap about doing that, but I guess years going by, and my belief gives me a more peaceful feeling about that. I think it's a miracle I was able to have this pointed out to me. Yeah, it hurt my mojo, but life is about working through the challengers. The thing is is to notice this and able to be shown it and learn from it. Yes, that is maturity. I guess, no one ever said maturity was glamorous. ( Part of maturity is about admitting one has done and said wrong)

I see this as immaturity; (IMO) maturity shows itself as-- one who will not only acknowledge, but take accountability for their part and do whatever it takes to make things right.

You are right: setting aside a defensive ego, swallowing pride, and being humble is the direction towards maturity. In all honesty, there have been many times I have wondered if MW is not a lot younger then he claims.

I often wondered that, and many other things myself. But I digress on that now, because I shrug my shoulders on that and move along to others. There are other posters here, if at first I think as some who don't realize certain things, to now pay more attention to and realize they actually see themselves as making mistakes, learning from others, and feel infallible but deal with it. It's a lot more relaxing that way. And you are right on about what you said about maturity!

[SHaYap]

As much as the mind is able, that's only as much as God or any Gods can perceptibly fill ...

The 2015 Sabah earthquake (Malay: Gempa Bumi Sabah 2015) struck Ranau, Sabah, Malaysia with a moment magnitude of 6.0 on 5 June,^[1] which lasted for 30 seconds.^[3] The earthquake was the strongest to affect Malaysia since 1976.^[4]

^...

Local native beliefs

According to the claims of local native, the earthquake was caused by "aki" (the mountain protectors) who had become angered over the acts of ten western tourists (comprising six men and four women from Canada, Germany, Netherlands and the United Kingdom)^[17] who "stripped and urinated at the mountain (which is believed by local natives as a sacred place) on 30 May", six days before the earthquake happened.^[18][19] The tourists also shouted vulgarities when they were told to desist by their mountain guide.^[20][21] The acts provoked outrage among Sabahan natives who want all of the alleged offenders charged in native court and forced to pay the "sogit", a type of compensation, given in the form of money or livestock, to appease the aggrieved party according to local Kadazan-Dusun native customs. It is imposed on wrongdoers for the purpose of appeasing "the aggrieved", thus placating the native community.^[22] The naked disrespect was also condemned by Malaysian Science Minister who said:

Science has no answer to that (the sacred mountain). If the mountain is sacred, we have to respect that. It is part of the traditional and local knowledge that are increasingly recognised by the international community.

^[23]

One of the deceased mountain guides brother also criticised the behaviour of the tourists saying :

It is not about laws or superstition, but about having mutual respect among human beings. As a Christian, I too do not believe in superstition, but I adhere to the advice and beliefs of the elders out of respect. It is part of being humans, we don't do things that will offend our fellow-human beings whether they are Muslims, Christian or Animists. This is something we taught here, but I guess a person like him (one of the bad nudist) doesn't have this in him.

^[24]

• wiki link
  

Kinabalu mountain 'nudists': Tourists in Malaysia court

• 
  10 June 2015
  

Why is Kinabalu sacred?

• Sabah's Kadazan Dusun tribe believe the mountain houses the spirits of their dead ancestors.
  
• The name Kinabalu is derived from the tribe's phrase "Aki Nabalu", which means resting place of the dead.
  
• Climbers are told by guides, many of whom are Kadazan Dusun, to treat the mountain with respect and to refrain from shouting, screaming or cursing at it.
  
• Every December the tribe conducts a ritual called the Monolob to appease the spirits and allow climbers to continue visiting the mountain.
  
• A priestess, called a Bobolian, makes an offering of seven white chickens accompanied by seven chicken eggs, betel nuts, tobacco, limestone powder, and betel plant leaves. The Bobolian leads a chant and the chickens are then slaughtered, cooked, and given to the ceremony participants.
  
• In the past, this ceremony was conducted before every ascent, and climbers used the cooked meat as rations for their journey.
  

• bbc link
  

~ Someone commented if it was these idiots that offended the gods then why was it locals that were punished ? Because the locals did not do enough protect the sacred grounds, which was their responsibility ... 'covenant' if you will ...

Ahhhh ... the human mind ... neither is it entirely heart nor soul entirely ...

~

[+Paranoid Android]

That would be correct if you were correct and had got your understanding correct "I DO NOT LIE" is a present tense statement saying that i do not lie.

So you have not lied on UM (an anonymous internet site which we cannot confirm information pertinent to your life). But in your life outside of UM, in the past you have lied, but we have only your word that you have not been lying since you joined UM. Sorry, but you yourself said that one lie can ruin your credibility, and in my eyes, that has been proven true in totality. Sorry, mate, that's just the way it is. Don't get me wrong, I'm no perfect angel, but I don't base my arguments on "I'm super smart and never lie so you should believe me because you have no reason not to", that is where we differ. If you hadn't continuously brought up your commitment to truth as a compelling reason why we should believe you, this would be a non-issue.

As said a few posts back, why should I believe your current explanation of the lights you saw? Why shouldn't I side with those who saw the lights but you told them was just a truck? Maybe you did see a truck, and told those witnesses that, but as time went by you began to tell yourself that it wasn't a truck, that it was something more, and then as more time went by you convinced yourself that this is so, but the truth is you really did just see a truck?!?!

Edited June 12, 2015 by Paranoid Android

[+Liquid Gardens]

Your opinions are formed within your own mind from its own world view and biases.

As is yours.

Your language is intensely emotive and biased.

'Intensely' emotive? You must not read many other comment sections on the internet if you think my replies are 'intense'. Regardless, if you don't want to receive responses that are emotive, you may want to consider refraining from referring to other posters as 'biased' with, as usual, no evidence to back it up. Or to put it another way, 'don't dish it out if you can't take it'.

Just a perceived one where PA has jumped to an inaccurate perception about. Thus my perfection remains untainted.

That may be the case, now that you have clarified that you are no longer a liar but were in the past, that specific perceived inconsistency has been mostly resolved. (This doesn't get you around what PA has noted, that 'one lie ruins credibility', which was your own rule; or is that also 'one lie ruins credibility but only after MW has given up lying'?). What does seem to be tainted is the perfection of your ability to communicate, but it is refreshing that you yourself noted that you can see how people come to their conclusions based on what you have written and your possibly imperfect use of punctuation.

LQ has formed an opinion based on PREVIOUS beliefs world views and opinions We ALL do this and it is hard not to operate in this way. He reads my posts through a preconceived conceptual reality.

Yes, we all do this, I would add that I've also formed an opinion on (true) facts and evidence also. Everybody looks at everything through a preconceived conceptual reality, there's nothing necessarily wrong with that. Absent any evidence, I will likely deny claims that the sun will not rise tomorrow because of my 'preconceived conceptual reality', which on this front, I have lots of evidence I'm actually sharing with a great many people and is based on 'pre-gathered' evidence.

One can tell this about many posters in the way they don't actually read what I post but read and respond to what they THINK/BELIVE I am saying

What point of yours do you think I've not actually read? I skim a lot of your posts because they are repetitive I'll admit, but I don't think I've 'not read' any of your relevant points. Uhhh, everyone, including yourself, read and respond to what they think is being said, I'm not sure of any other way to do it.

(and not just my posts but any post they disagree with)

I know! It's like we're in a forum specifically set up for discussions of something! The nerve of them...

To try and get back to whatever meat is left on the bones of this dessicated topic, here would be my current issue with what I think/believe you are saying. When you say I'm biased, I presume you mean that I am being unfairly biased (yes, I am heavily 'biased' towards propositions that have evidence to support them). I'm not going to look for the exact post now, but we had taken a significant step forward amidst our head-butting: you agreed that it would be irrational and illogical for Sherapy I believe it was to accept the truth of your stories merely on your say-so, which is all there is to work with since your evidences are not 'transferrable'. This admission/agreement to me gets us so close to resolution of almost everything, in that you should understand perfectly how everyone here who does not think your stories accurately reflect objective reality rationally and logically do not accept them. It doesn't matter what you claim to know, that's the starting point and doesn't rationally become more convincing based on how many times you state it, how many other claims you layer on top of it, or how often you state your confidence in yourself.

The main topic concerning your stories is, why is what you claim to be knowledge actually true? Note that this is a different question than why you believe it to be true, it is that different question that gets us into the quagmire of you stating things about yourself that are not really relevant (remember, no one should be accepting what you claim merely on your say-so, something you agreed to). It is on this question that 'transferrable' evidences are critical. You've tried many times to say that transferrable evidences aren't really that important; from your own personal belief system maybe not, but we're trying to determine again why your claims are true, not why you specifically believe them to be, which could include things like faith, 'because believing these things makes me feel better', etc. Your posts almost always address why you believe what you believe to be true, not why it is true.

So given our agreement on that main point, no one should just accept what other people merely claim, what is the problem, what different responses are you expecting? Please don't say again you are refuting those who say it's 'impossible', I still haven't seen anybody say that, least of all myself. Why do you keep accusing others of being biased? That doesn't seem to fit with what you've pretty much agreed, that they are being rational given what they have to work with, which is your non-transferrable evidences.

[Stubbly_Dooright]

As much as the mind is able, that's only as much as God or any Gods can perceptibly fill ...

• wiki link
  

• bbc link
  

~ Someone commented if it was these idiots that offended the gods then why was it locals that were punished ? Because the locals did not do enough protect the sacred grounds, which was their responsibility ... 'covenant' if you will ...

Ahhhh ... the human mind ... neither is it entirely heart nor soul entirely ...

~

I'm kind of confused of your post, (yeah, I liked it still, and where have you been?!?!? And thanks for keeping the kitty pick, but don't let me bully you into keeping it......................... where was I ............................. Oh yeah! ) Are you saying that people are not thinking of others when they think the locals are at fault for nature's work?

So you have not lied on UM (an anonymous internet site which we cannot confirm information pertinent to your life). But in your life outside of UM, in the past you have lied, but we have only your word that you have not been lying since you joined UM. Sorry, but you yourself said that one lie can ruin your credibility, and in my eyes, that has been proven true in totality. Sorry, mate, that's just the way it is. Don't get me wrong, I'm no perfect angel, but I don't base my arguments on "I'm super smart and never lie so you should believe me because you have no reason not to", that is where we differ. If you hadn't continuously brought up your commitment to truth as a compelling reason why we should believe you, this would be a non-issue.

As said a few posts back, why should I believe your current explanation of the lights you saw? Why shouldn't I side with those who saw the lights but you told them was just a truck? Maybe you did see a truck, and told those witnesses that, but as time went by you began to tell yourself that it wasn't a truck, that it was something more, and then as more time went by you convinced yourself that this is so, but the truth is you really did just see a truck?!?!

This whole situation reminds me a while back on here, when there was this young lady who posted here. Very Christian, and she was honest. Never boasted about it, but I felt she was. One thread she started when she talked about being pulled over by the police for something. (she probably was not aware she was doing it) but she kept telling them that she wouldn't lie about anything, because she was Christian. They still did their job, (I forgot the tidbits of why she was pulled over) but I remember her asking us why is it they did not rely on her answers to their questions, because she was a Christian and so she was honest. I think she felt insulted. We all were trying to tell here, it's not they don't believe you were dishonest, but dishonest people can lie about being a Christian. She didn't get that. I felt bad for her confusion. ..................... *shrugs*

That may be the case, now that you have clarified that you are no longer a liar but were in the past, that specific perceived inconsistency has been mostly resolved. (This doesn't get you around what PA has noted, that 'one lie ruins credibility', which was your own rule; or is that also 'one lie ruins credibility but only after MW has given up lying'?). What does seem to be tainted is the perfection of your ability to communicate, but it is refreshing that you yourself noted that you can see how people come to their conclusions based on what you have written and your possibly imperfect use of punctuation.

I don't get it. I thought when one says their parents raised them to be honest, I would think that also meant you didn't lie in the past as well? Do I remember parents raising one to be honest as part of the history? Edited June 12, 2015 by Stubbly_Dooright

[+Sherapy]

You see. AGAIN You mis read and then misrepresent what I have posted, I have NEVER claimed to have never to have lied, and in many posts have told stories of my youth, in which I lied. Somehow you have in your mind a distorted perception of what I have claimed. I can see you in 5 years time still saying "but MW claimed he never lied and PA proved him wrong . " Both parts of which statement remain factually false. It is you constructing some concept of me which doesn't exist. We've been over the rest ad infinitum and I have nothing to add. Your mind disclosed to everything you don't believe in. When a person calls you a liar he is attacking your character and probity. What concerns me is that this is the old game, where failing to make progress in factual/logical argument, a poster attacks the person's character /probity in order to discredit their content.

http://jonsenglishsite.info/Class%20Docs%205/Terms_of_Argument29.pdf

We teach our kids that the purpose of writing is to become better thinkers; arguing (essay) is one way we do this. We also teach them that credibility is imperative. Our school does this in 3 ways, We teach our kids that most of their efforts come from how knowledgeable/ informed they are on their topic. We teach them that the writing speaks of their character, so do not assume or make guesses, or go off memory, or hope for the best, put the effort into the position they are arguing and do not insult the intelligence of others by thinking they won't know anyways, or they won't check, if they do this--their efforts will speak for themselves. And, finally, we teach them what it means to argue in good will, that one must not only take into consideration their point of view, but others as well, and we teach how to be respectful and allow for the right of the person to conclude based on the facts and the evidence, and to be open to refining when in error. We teach that integrity of the written word is a reflection of them, that trustworthiness matters, never think one is above double checking or providing sources, or is beyond making errors.

Cicero once quoted, " we give no credit to a liar; even when he speaks the truth" sadly to say once a person loses credibility it is difficult to get back.

MW, what you may not realize is that when facts are misconstrued, and evidence is not provided, or is made up, or claims are made about ones logical prowess that is not evident, or that when one refuses to provide data when asked, and refuses to self correct in an attempt to persuade others to take your point of view no questions asked, and then blame everyone for their choices, they are encouraging others to practice unethical behavior. (In our school teachers have been fired for less).The argument itself must be composed in a way as to stand on its own merits. The consensus is that your claim has been rejected on the grounds that your evidence is not credible. You are correct there is nothing more to discuss. All the best.

Edited June 13, 2015 by Sherapy

[=Jak=]

:D

You know, there are times I want to hug you you little birdie!!! :D

And here's a 'fun time fact' one could impose on right now.

Knowledge can be lied about.

We live in lie, once we learnt A for Apple

[Mr Walker]

http://jonsenglishsi..._Argument29.pdf

We teach our kids that the purpose of writing is to become better thinkers; arguing (essay) is one way we do this. We also teach them that credibility is imperative. Our school does this in 3 ways, We teach our kids that most of their efforts come from how knowledgeable/ informed they are on their topic. We teach them that the writing speaks of their character, so do not assume or make guesses, or go off memory, or hope for the best, put the effort into the position they are arguing and do not insult the intelligence of others by thinking they won't know anyways, or they won't check, if they do this--their efforts will speak for themselves. And, finally, we teach them what it means to argue in good will, that one must not only take into consideration their point of view, but others as well, and we teach how to be respectful and allow for the right of the person to conclude based on the facts and the evidence, and to be open to refining when in error. We teach that integrity of the written word is a reflection of them, that trustworthiness matters, never think one is above double checking or providing sources, or is beyond making errors.

Cicero once quoted, " we give no credit to a liar; even when he speaks the truth" sadly to say once a person loses credibility it is difficult to get back.

MW, what you may not realize is that when facts are misconstrued, and evidence is not provided, or is made up, or claims are made about ones logical prowess that is not evident, or that when one refuses to provide data when asked, and refuses to self correct in an attempt to persuade others to take your point of view no questions asked, and then blame everyone for their choices, they are encouraging others to practice unethical behavior. (In our school teachers have been fired for less).The argument itself must be composed in a way as to stand on its own merits. The consensus is that your claim has been rejected on the grounds that your evidence is not credible. You are correct there is nothing more to discuss. All the best.

[Mr Walker]

http://jonsenglishsi..._Argument29.pdf

We teach our kids that the purpose of writing is to become better thinkers; arguing (essay) is one way we do this. We also teach them that credibility is imperative. Our school does this in 3 ways, We teach our kids that most of their efforts come from how knowledgeable/ informed they are on their topic. We teach them that the writing speaks of their character, so do not assume or make guesses, or go off memory, or hope for the best, put the effort into the position they are arguing and do not insult the intelligence of others by thinking they won't know anyways, or they won't check, if they do this--their efforts will speak for themselves. And, finally, we teach them what it means to argue in good will, that one must not only take into consideration their point of view, but others as well, and we teach how to be respectful and allow for the right of the person to conclude based on the facts and the evidence, and to be open to refining when in error. We teach that integrity of the written word is a reflection of them, that trustworthiness matters, never think one is above double checking or providing sources, or is beyond making errors.

Cicero once quoted, " we give no credit to a liar; even when he speaks the truth" sadly to say once a person loses credibility it is difficult to get back.

MW, what you may not realize is that when facts are misconstrued, and evidence is not provided, or is made up, or claims are made about ones logical prowess that is not evident, or that when one refuses to provide data when asked, and refuses to self correct in an attempt to persuade others to take your point of view no questions asked, and then blame everyone for their choices, they are encouraging others to practice unethical behavior. (In our school teachers have been fired for less).The argument itself must be composed in a way as to stand on its own merits. The consensus is that your claim has been rejected on the grounds that your evidence is not credible. You are correct there is nothing more to discuss. All the best.

Not sure what you are implying in the first part of your post. As to the last. I do provide facts. You chose not to believe them. I cannot provide transferrable evidences, but this is not required for you to accept that i can establish reality using personal evidences and you would not accept them as evidences anyway.. You claim I cannot establish reality unless I can prove that reality to you. . I wont correct when I am not wrong. (a logical impossibility anyway) Your personal imputations are again irrelevant. My argument stands. You chose not to believe it. My parents taught me, "When faced with being/doing right, or being/doing what is popular, chose to be right." Good advice, because being unpopular can't do you any harm, but being wrong can be deadly. I hope your schools also teach students not to compromise their own ideas and values, or ethics and morals, just to accommodate the feelings of other children, or to be popular. Who else but you is to "blame' for how you view my claims? You are ENTIRELY responsible for how you view the world and the people in it, including me. I do not, in anyway create or form your opinions or feelings about me. YOU do that. Likewise I am entirely responsible for how I perceive, and feel about, you. This is a difficult concept for "even" me to accept and implement in practice but it is the case. I create the construct of ideas and opinions I have about the entity called "Sherapy". I am responsible for this creation. Not you. You might claim to be a child abusing Satanist or a misogynist male. Only I can construct my response to your claim, and I have to own that response. You can't make me feel anything about your claim and you are not responsible for how I would feel

[SHaYap]

I'm kind of confused of your post, (yeah, I liked it still, and where have you been?!?!? And thanks for keeping the kitty pick, but don't let me bully you into keeping it......................... where was I ............................. Oh yeah! ) Are you saying that people are not thinking of others when they think the locals are at fault for nature's work?

~snip

In this instance its merely a case of an unfortunate incident where logic got the rug pulled from under it, it happens all the time though not usually with such tragic consequences.

Under such conditions the thinking process usually falls pretty short every which way the mind cares to apply its mighty prowess. There is no fault due anyone except the fault in the Earth's crust.

If these tourists had chose to behave then this earthquake would have just happened without any other extraordinary incidences except the ground shaking and some victims whom tragically lost their lives. As it is, as it goes ... now there will be more than Gods to appease.

...

kitty three eye is happy ... so am I ... thanks to you

~

[Stubbly_Dooright]

Sheri:

There should be more schools like yours and teachers like you!

We live in lie, once we learnt A for Apple

Wow, reflective. And as a retail *ahem* 'queen' all my adult life, how can I refute that!

In this instance its merely a case of an unfortunate incident where logic got the rug pulled from under it, it happens all the time though not usually with such tragic consequences.

Under such conditions the thinking process usually falls pretty short every which way the mind cares to apply its mighty prowess. There is no fault due anyone except the fault in the Earth's crust.

If these tourists had chose to behave then this earthquake would have just happened without any other extraordinary incidences except the ground shaking and some victims whom tragically lost their lives. As it is, as it goes ... now there will be more than Gods to appease.

That is what I thought you thought. Thanks for clarifying. It always seems that some have the wrong kind of need to blame something.

I reflected recently, how it seems that some need to blame others for tragedies, for what has happened. Of course, there are those when dealing with forgiveness too, but this is mentioned as a side note. I often thought on the freakish accidents and the natural disasters when it comes of being victims to it. You can't blame, and there is nothing to forgive. How do you blame a tornado for taking your house away? Logically you just can't. I feel angry and frustrated in all situations that are bad, but I remember the October storm here about three years ago, and for it's 'hell' it caused, I can't beat it to submission to make me feel better. (yeah like you think I can ) Good point there

...

kitty three eye is happy ... so am I ... thanks to you

~

AWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW warm and fuzzies!!! WARM AND FUZZIES!!

Goes good with coffee............................ much better than oatmeal!!! No....................... thank you!