Japan earthquake & tsunami

[spiraldoor]

I mean I've never been on another forum where people point out others' grammar mistakes, let alone this extensively.

Whose grammar mistakes are you talking about, and whom did you mean when you referred to the ‘grammar Nazis’ which ‘constantly barrage’ this forum? I did nothing of the sort. The distinction between ‘proof’ and ‘suggestion’ is utterly irrelevant to the issue I took with Xenon’s post; rather than respond to my comment on his thoughts regarding God and the tsunami (the actual intended subject of this discussion), he chose to focus entirely on my use of the word ‘prove’. It is quite ridiculous of you to claim that I ‘extensively’ point out people’s spelling mistakes when this is utterly untrue.

Then why exactly did you post in the first place, I wonder? The fact that you emphasised the word 'prove' implies you were responding specifically to my use of the word.

Quotation marks do not imply ‘emphasis’; they indicate that one is using the words of another or words which are not of their own choice. You seem to be confusing quotation marks with italics. The reason I posted in the first place was that I had an issue with your philosophical logic; absolutely nothing to do with your choice of words.

Any religious person can draw conclusions based on what they perceive as the behaviour and characteristics of a god. If a religious person believes the earth and all its shaping was formed by this god, they must intrinsically understand what he's accountable for, and can make assumptions surrounding this.

I think it is hopeless and futile for any human being to attempt to grasp the meanings behind the action or inaction of a hypothetical being who possesses infinite power and wisdom. I found it particularly illogical that you interpreted the Japan tsunami as ‘proof’ (later revised to a ‘suggestion’) that God does not exist; what about the millions of other natural disasters that have claimed innocent lives? Were those not relevant? Nonetheless: any conclusion made by feeble mortals such as us regarding the machinations of some almighty and incomprehensible intellect are deeply undermined from the outset.

Jeez Louise, Spiraldoor, you are picking on the qualities that make humans imperfect. If every single thing I said was a hundred percent accurate or flawless, I would kill myself. Don't be a consequentialist. Don't say you aren't being one, because you are.

What the hell are you talking about? No, I am not ‘picking on the qualities that make humans imperfect’; what on earth gave you that impression? Are you referring to your mistaken belief that I attacked Xenon for his grammar or my claim that a human being cannot comprehend a being of infinite power and wisdom? I find your claim that you would kill yourself if everything you said was perfect quite disturbing; may I ask why you would want to die if you were right all the time? Finally: please do not introduce obscure philosophical terms into this discussion. I had to look up ‘consequentialism’. (Did you learn it in class today or something? Seems extremely out-of-the-blue.) Apparently it is a school of thought which can be summarised as the belief that ‘the end justifies the means’. Now, would you please explain to me exactly how this is connected with my views of God, humanity, grammar and perfectionism? Your introduction of this concept into the discussion genuinely baffles me; I have no idea what you think you are saying. And finally: please do not make absolutely random and unsupported claims about me and then proceed to tell me that they are absolutely true and I have no say in the matter. You are being rather silly.

[Adsolution]

No I didn't "just learn it in school today," I merely said that because Xenon said something that was intended to be interpreted slightly differently than how he said it, something people in general do quite often. Although I assumed people knew what the word meant. It's not about religion, it's just commonly associated with religion.

Please don't ruin another meaningful thread with wall-posts and stubborn arguments hardly anyone agrees with (there's a reason for it), I'm done with that. Let a light-hearted conversation remain light-hearted, don't use it as a key to dump your loads and loads of negative opinions on people. I can guarantee that people rolled their eyes the minute they saw your wall post.

[spiraldoor]

No I didn't "just learn it in school today," I merely said that because Xenon said something that was intended to be interpreted slightly differently than how he said it, something people in general do quite often. Although I assumed people knew what the word meant. It's not about religion, it's just commonly associated with religion.

So Xenon said something slightly different than what he meant, and I responded to it, therefore I think the end justifies the means? You make no sense at all.

Please don't ruin another meaningful thread with wall-posts and stubborn arguments hardly anyone agrees with (there's a reason for it), I'm done with that. Let a light-hearted conversation remain light-hearted, don't use it as a key to dump your loads and loads of negative opinions on people. I can guarantee that people rolled their eyes the minute they saw your wall post.

There is so much wrong with this paragraph that I don’t even know where to begin. You claim that I am ‘ruining’ a ‘meaningful thread’; this is absolutely not true. My posts were entirely on-topic and related to the subject matter of this thread until other members began to focus on my use of punctuation. Rather than respond to any of my well-developed points, you brusquely accuse me of making ‘wall-posts’ and ‘stubborn arguments’ before moving on swiftly to another subject. You have already lobbed many unjust and unsupported accusations at me in this thread alone; I have calmly and carefully responded to each and every one, yet you seem unable to treat me with the same respect, choosing to brush my thoughts aside with your patronising labels. You claim that hardly anyone ever agrees with what I am saying (and imply that this in some way means that I am wrong); this is unfair, unsupported and untrue. You accuse me of posting ‘loads and loads of negative opinions’; first of all, what opinions are you referring to? My opinions on God? The tsunami? Grammar? Perfectionism? I often have no idea what you are talking about, yet you are steadfast in your refusal to elaborate. You also imply that having negative opinions is a bad thing and that they should not be shared; this is myopic and more importantly irrevelant. You offer me a nebulous ‘guarantee’ that ‘people’ rolled their eyes at my previous post purely because it was long; what a short-sighted attitude you display. There is nothing wrong with long posts; not everyone can fit all of their thoughts into a brief one. Perhaps your posts would be as long as mine if you also responded comprehensively and respectfully to the points raised by others; instead you choice to dismiss, ignore and gloss over virtually everything I say, making up with unpleasant condescention for what you lack in resolution and courtesy.

[Xenon]

Quotation marks do not imply ‘emphasis’; they indicate that one is using the words of another or words which are not of their own choice. You seem to be confusing quotation marks with italics. The reason I posted in the first place was that I had an issue with your philosophical logic; absolutely nothing to do with your choice of words.

I know this, too. What I meant is that you brought the word 'prove' to attention by inserting quotation marks around it. If you had absolutely no intention of referring to my choice of the word, then I have misinterpreted your post.

However, your disposition to correct and educate shines through even in this post.

I think it is hopeless and futile for any human being to attempt to grasp the meanings behind the action or inaction of a hypothetical being who possesses infinite power and wisdom. I found it particularly illogical that you interpreted the Japan tsunami as ‘proof’ (later revised to a ‘suggestion’) that God does not exist; what about the millions of other natural disasters that have claimed innocent lives? Were those not relevant? Nonetheless: any conclusion made by feeble mortals such as us regarding the machinations of some almighty and incomprehensible intellect are deeply undermined from the outset.

This is a really long-winded way of saying "humans cannot understand superior beings because we don't know anything about them". Religious people already have their own interpretation of God, and they collectively perceive God as being benevolent. They may not know anything about him, as such, but that is what faith and religion is all about. It is not unreasonable if their subjective views are altered by events like the Japan tsunami.

As for the millions of other natural disasters, I never said anything about them.

[Adsolution]

Yes, ehm, you are (sort of) ruining this thread, Spiral. You pick on Xenon's wording of "prove" even after he admitted "suggest" was a better word, and then... never mind. All you ever appear to do is go around looking for things to pick on. I'm not saying that's what you're doing, but it's what it heavily appears to be. I think you need to learn some life skills and let some things like a miswording-and-admittance go, which any reasonable person without a mane of glory would rightfully do. Answer me this: Why do you think pretty much nobody ever agrees with you? And it's not just that - I wouldn't have a problem with it if you expressed your thoughts as opinions - it's that your force your opinions upon others and act super offended with the person's reply no matter how they reply. Would I want to have someone like that for a friend? No. Would I want to engage in a conversation with that person? No. Would I want to be near that person? No.

Please do not suggest that I was incapable of understanding you purely because my response focused on your use of the term ‘prove’. I know what you meant, and my response holds true regardless of whether what you wrote and what you meant are the same.

Insignificant humans cannot glean ‘suggestions’ about such an incomprehensibly superior being simply by observing what we perceive as its behaviour.

Bam, that's black-and-white. Xenon and you both agreed that it's an easy thing to understand, why correct it unnecessarily? It was extremely unnecessary.

Why am I pointing this out then? Because it annoys everyone. Kind of like this: "Oh Jeez, would this guy just let it go? The other guy just tripped across the wrong word. He never stops...."

[Xenon]

Well Rayfan I think with regards to his choice of punctuation and my choice of wording, we have both conceded that we simply misunderstood each other.

[Adsolution]

Well Rayfan I think with regards to his choice of punctuation and my choice of wording, we have both conceded that we simply misunderstood each other.

Agreed. Lets move on now.

[Cairnie]

And allow me to share a related happy story with you all.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12957838

[Adsolution]

Aw yes, I just saw that on TV while reading your link.

[Haruka]

And allow me to share a related happy story with you all.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12957838

That wasn't talked in the news here, but I'm glad that both reunited again.

Unfortuneatly animals are usually dragged away by the tsunamis.

[spiraldoor]

Sigh

Code: Select all

[quote="Xenon"]I know this, too. :wink: What I meant is that you brought the word 'prove' to attention by inserting quotation marks around it.  If you had absolutely no intention of referring to my choice of the word, then I have misinterpreted your post.[/quote]
You did misinterpret my post. By no means did I intend to target your use of the term ‘prove’ as incorrect; I thought you were saying what you meant, and I responded appropriately. I placed the word within quotation marks because I did not feel right applying such concrete terms to the abstract and the infinite (as the rest of my post should indicate). It did not even occur to me that this might be construed as some sort of grammatical criticism until after the fact.

[quote="Xenon"]However, your disposition to correct and educate shines through even in this post.
[...]
This is a really long-winded way of saying "humans cannot understand superior beings because we don't know anything about them".  Religious people [i]already[/i] have their own interpretation of God, and they collectively perceive God as being benevolent.  They may not know anything about him, as such, but that is what faith and religion is all about.  It is not unreasonable if their subjective views are altered by events like the Japan tsunami.

As for the millions of other natural disasters, I never said anything about them.[/quote]
Subjective perceptions of God can be shaped by any manner of external circumstances; of course a religious person can make personal decisions about their perceived God by observing and contemplating the events that take place around them. However, I do not accept the notion that such conclusions have any merit. Altering the perceptions of individuals is one thing, but drawing objective conclusions (which I thought you were doing before you corrected your wording) is quite another. I do not believe the latter is even possible. I know you did not mention the millions of other natural disasters; I simply think that the fact of them serves to further undermine the idea that the occurrence of the tsunami could have any profound meaning on one’s perception of God. If the tsunami is enough to convince someone that God is uncaring or non-existent, wouldn’t they have already arrived at this conclusion purely through their knowledge of the millions of similar catastrophes?

[quote="RayFan9876"]Yes, ehm, you are ruining this thread, Spiral. You pick on Xenon's wording of "prove" even after he admitted "suggest" was a better word, and then... never mind. All you ever appear to do is go around looking for things to pick on. I'm not saying that's what you're doing, but it's what it heavily appears to be. I think you need to learn some life skills and let some things like a miswording-and-admittance go, which any reasonable person without a mane of glory would rightfully do. Answer me this: Why do you think pretty much nobody ever agrees with you? And it's not just that - I wouldn't have a problem with it if you expressed your thoughts as opinions - it's that your force your opinions upon others and act super offended with the person's reply no matter how they reply. Would I want to have someone like that for a friend? No. Would I want to engage in a conversation with that person? No. Would I want to be near that person? No.[/quote]
I am troubled by your seeming inability to absorb any of the information I give to you. I have already explained – several times – that I did not pick on Xenon’s wording, and that my issue was with his philosophical comment regarding God and the tsunami. You continually call me a ‘grammar Nazi’, say that I am ‘barraging’ the forum with my ‘extensive’ corrections of others’ grammar mistakes... none of these accusations are true in the slightest, yet you continue to hurl them at me. How many times will I have to explain that Xenon’s grammar was not the subject of my post before you will stop calling me these names? You claim that ‘all you ever appear to do is go around looking for things to pick on’ – I have absolutely no idea where you are getting these absurd ideas. Could you please give me some examples of what you perceive as my ‘looking for things to pick on’? You claim that I ‘need to learn some life skills’ – this is a highly personal and uncalled-for comment, and again you fail to explain what you mean. You say I refuse to ‘let a miswording-and-admittance go’; you act as if I am viciously pursuing Xenon for his choice of words, when in reality I am simply defending myself from your bizarre insistence that I am a ‘grammar Nazi’. Could you please point out exactly where I demonstrate my lack of ‘life skills’ by calling out Xenon’s wording? I never did such a thing. You claim that nobody ever agrees with me – this is simply not true at all. Do you want me to post a list of times when people agreed with me? What an absurd criticism to make. You accuse me of ‘forcing my opinions upon others’ – yet again you leave me baffled. I have no idea what you are talking about. Please start using examples to illustrate these comments; it is difficult to defend myself from such abstract criticisms. Are you saying that I am forcing my opinions of God on people? My opinions of humanity? Of perfectionism? Of grammar? This is an open forum where everyone is free to share their views; I see nothing untoward or oppressive about my posts here. You say I ‘act super-offended’ when people reply to me, ‘no matter how they reply’. Like most things you have said to me in this thread, this is untrue. While I have indeed been offended by several of the things you have said about me (particularly your relentless insistence that I was criticising Xenon’s grammar when I have explained clearly and repeatedly that this is not the case), I have remained perfectly calm and respectful throughout this discussion. Xenon’s replies to my posts are actually relevant to the points I raise, and he does not insult me – these are the sort of discussions I like to have. I assure you that your dislike for me is reciprocated; judging by the posts you have directed at me thus far, you are not the sort of person I would like to befriend or be near (though I am happy to converse with all sorts; I think it is healthy).

[quote="RayFan9876"]Bam, that's black-and-white. Xenon and you both agreed that it's an easy thing to understand, why correct it unnecessarily? It was extremely unnecessary.[/quote]
I never ‘corrected’ Xenon. I simply responded to what I thought he was saying. In the paragraph you just quoted, I explained that his choice of words was irrelevant, as my response remained valid under the meaning he intended or the one I perceived. I then posted a revised version of my response, slightly tailored to suit Xenon’s slightly revised wording.

[quote="RayFan9876"]Why am I pointing this out then? Because it annoys everyone. Kind of like this: "Oh Jeez, would this guy just let it go? The other guy just tripped across the wrong word. He never stops...."[/quote]
Yet again you resort to utterly false accusations of ‘grammar Nazism’. When will it end? I don’t understand why you are doing this to me. Do you genuinely still not understand the meaning of those quotation marks, even after my numerous and thorough explanations? Even if I had been correcting his grammer (which I certainly was not), you are still exaggerating this situation to an absurd and unjustifiable magnitude with your claims of my ‘extensive barrage’ of grammatical corrections. You are behaving like a character from some sort of comedy sketch. There is also the matter that you have ignored perhaps 90% of the points I raised in my previous posts in favour of sweeping dismissals (and are likely to ignore the majority of this post in the same way), but that behaviour seems engrained and unlikely to change – your posts in our two or three previous debates were of a very similar persuasion.

[DesLife]

Oh, thanks for using

Code: Select all

, that makes your useless walls of text less annoying.

[Adsolution]

2 Things:

1) Your lack of "life skills" aka communication skills, come from how people's responses.

Oh, thanks for using

Code: Select all

, that makes your useless walls of text less annoying.[/quote]

2) [img]http://www.dynagram.com/images/boutons/btn_win.gif[/img][img]http://www.dynagram.com/images/boutons/btn_win.gif[/img][img]http://www.dynagram.com/images/boutons/btn_win.gif[/img][img]http://www.dynagram.com/images/boutons/btn_win.gif[/img][img]http://www.dynagram.com/images/boutons/btn_win.gif[/img][img]http://www.dynagram.com/images/boutons/btn_win.gif[/img]


@Haruka:

It's unfortunately so. We must also take note that many, many more fish are killed by tsunamis than land animals.

[Haruka]

It's unfortunately so. We must also take note that many, many more fish are killed by tsunamis than land animals.

That's also true. Nature is quite dangerous.

[spiraldoor]

1) Your lack of "life skills" aka communication skills, come from how people's responses.

Oh, thanks for using

Code: Select all

, that makes your useless walls of text less annoying.[/quote][/quote]
Life skills are not the same as communication skills; your conflation of the two drastically altered the meaning of your previous post. Nonetheless it is quite absurd to claim that I lack communication skills; as you are undoubtedly aware, I am perfectly adept at expressing my thoughts to others. To quote a snark made at my expense by DesLife as evidence that I lack communication skills is as baffling as any of your other arguments; the light-hearted jab simply does not hold up under scrutiny (for reasons you should be able to see for yourself; feel free to ask me for elaboration if you cannot). Clearly a complaint that my posts are long does not render me devoid of communication skills.

[DesLife]

I am perfectly adept at expressing my thoughts to others.

But I don't think you even try to understand their thoughts.

[Adsolution]

I am perfectly adept at expressing my thoughts to others.

But I don't think you even try to understand their thoughts.

That made me LAUGH SO HARD. Seriously. +10 to you Deslife.

[Haruka]

But I don't think you even try to understand their thoughts.

[spiraldoor]

I am perfectly adept at expressing my thoughts to others.

But I don't think you even try to understand their thoughts.

What do you mean? I successfully attempt to understand the thoughts of others at all times. Could you please provide some examples to support your statement?

[DesLife]

I have in mind countless debates where you gave me the impression that you didn't try to understand others' posts. About gay marriage or gay adoption for example.