Forum: Author Hangout

Do you truly want to start a religious discussion on this forum? Seriously? The mere thought makes me shudder in fear already.

I have no desire to argue with the bible-thumpers.

Then stop giving them opportunities to argue with you.

Prayers? Empty, useless platitudes. Completely ineffective. At most, like pissing yourself while wearing dark pants. It gives you a warm feeling but nobody notices. (definitely nobody listening.)

Agnostic that I am, I still recognize that prayers often mean a whole lot to a person that believes they make a difference. The term probably came into vogue when the vast majority of the country were still (somewhat) devout Christians.

Surely you can understand what using an outdated term can do to a discussion. Common racial pejoratives are a fine example of that. Imagine using one of the common ones referring to black Americans in common use in the 60s and 70s today. Same thing here, except where "thoughts and prayers" are positive, racial pejoratives aren't.

I'd cut those who offer those "thoughts and prayers" a little slack as I imagine most are sincere.

Agnostic that I am, I still recognize that prayers often mean a whole lot to a person that believes they make a difference. The term probably came into vogue when the vast majority of the country were still (somewhat) devout Christians.

Which isn't to mention the weirdness that can be the "placebo effect" in many cases. While I'm not going to harshly criticize hard core atheists for mocking "sky gods" and various other things.

I do think they're foolishly discounting the possibilty that there are potentially things on this world that we haven't yet begun to be able to even quantify, never mind bend to serious scientific inquiry.

There's plenty of things in our daily life that utilize scientific concepts and principles that would have had you locked away/labeled as a mad man even 100 years ago, nevermind a few more centuries back.

To think we've discovered all there is to discover about "the natural world" at this stage of the game is perhaps a wee bit arrogant?

Prayers are, generally speaking, mostly useless. That said, I do think that in some cases people have managed to use "prayer" as a means to tap into something we currently cannot quantify. (This gaining "super-natural" status, until it can be quantified) So in the off chance that they might manage to "tap" into whatever that something is by whatever means or accident, I certainly am not going to sneer at anyone who makes the attempt.

Isn't that the very definition of 'Agnostic': I can't prove it doesn't exist, so on the off-chance it does, I'll continue with the assumption it's true?

Depends on whose definitions we're using. I'm not strictly Agnostic, as I have a "leaning" towards a specific denomination even if I spend a lot of time being skeptical about a number of things related to it.

I do think there is "something out there" which is a bit beyond our current ability to identify and quantify at this time. Of course, I also am fairly certain I have had "interactions" with it on occasion, although I won't personally go so far as claiming it is intelligent unto itself as I've never experienced anything on that particular scale, my denominational choice certainly would make that claim.

I'm just more inclined to place it in a category kind of like infrared or ultraviolet light. Just because we didn't have a way to quantify or study it until comparatively recently, that doesn't mean it didn't exist until we could do so. ;)

Although it would be kind of awesome if ignorance of UV radiation rendered you immune to sunburns. Sadly, reality does not work that way.

Isn't that the very definition of 'Agnostic': I can't prove it doesn't exist, so on the off-chance it does, I'll continue with the assumption it's true?

To me, being agnostic means I don't know Who up there (if anyone) is turning the crank; I just hope S/He doesn't stop.

To me, being agnostic means I don't know Who up there (if anyone) is turning the crank; I just hope S/He doesn't stop.

Do you think that agnostics pray: "Oh my God (if there is a God), save my soul (if I have a soul)." That lets them hedge their bets!

Do you think that agnostics pray: "Oh my God (if there is a God), save my soul (if I have a soul)." That lets them hedge their bets!

I doubt that they do. A lot of what I feel about agnosticism was shaped by Robert Heinlein's writings. Discovered him when I was 14 and have never let go. In "Time Enough For Love", he came up with the Notebook of Lazarus Long. You can find it online. Hilarious and oh so prescient in a lot of ways. Anyhow, one of my favorites from the Notebook reads:

There is no conclusive evidence of life after death. But there is no evidence of any sort against it. Soon enough you will know. So why fret about it?

That pretty much sums up how I feel about both a Supreme Being(s) and prayer.

What I DO hold against them, is when they CLAIM to do something because of Christ's teaching, and then do something completely against his teachings.

Hypocrites are part of every large population grouping. Some just happen to be easier to find than others. Such as hypocritical Christians in an area that are majority Christian. And even Christ had little tolerance for those types, openly condemning people for being such on multiple occasions.

Edit: To be honest, from my recollections of Christ's own teachings. You're probably better off being a prostitute than a hypocrite, but those are things which are inconvenient for most people, and thus ignored.

Hypocrites are part of every large population grouping.

Hypocrisy is often an inevitable consequence of the way human brains function. When someone subconsciously notices one of their faults, and usually they do, but are unwilling to consciously accept it, as many often will not, the recognition must go somewhere. If the brain is prevented from pinning the fault on the person themselves it will search for someone else to pin it on.

For those who care, this can be illuminating. If you ever notice the level of your irritation with a particular person's fault feels somehow excessive, that is the time to look for that fault within yourself. It will be hard for you to spot but you can be sure that you do have that particular fault yourself.

For those who care, this can be illuminating. If you ever notice the level of your irritation with a particular person's fault feels somehow excessive, that is the time to look for that fault within yourself. It will be hard for you to spot but you can be sure that you do have that particular fault yourself.

And is probably part of the reason behind "opposites attract" in relationships. They're a fair bit less likely to "match" up on things that they "key into" as it were.

I know I am somewhat guilty about that with speech. Having had significant enunciation issues as a child, undergoing nearly 6 years of speech therapy at a nearby University as a consequence. People with obvious speech impediments drive me absolutely up a wall. Mostly because even now(decades later) I still consciously monitor my diction as I speak. Although oddly it is the ones with a lisp that seem to bother me the most, and that wasn't my problem at all. Meanwhile the guy talking in pigeon doesn't phase me.

I know I am somewhat guilty about that with speech. Having had significant enunciation issues as a child, undergoing nearly 6 years of speech therapy at a nearby University as a consequence

I have not had a speech impediment but I have to ask "what is correct enunciation/pronuciation"? The Bronx? Anchorage? New Delhi? New Orleans?

From the age of seven I got lectures about pronouncing words "correctly" and it must have had some effect; my wife's family gave me a hard time about my accent and she claims that in many decades it has moderated slightly.

(If you want so-called "correct" pronuciation hold your nose as you speak!)

I have to ask "what is correct enunciation/pronuciation"?

It's hard to go wrong with GA or RP, depending on which side of the pond you're on

Would you care to explain those abbreviations?

GA = Gallium and various things like goal allowed and references to Georgia but nothing about sounds

RP = received pronunciation, whatever that is

I have not had a speech impediment but I have to ask "what is correct enunciation/pronuciation"? The Bronx? Anchorage? New Delhi? New Orleans?

Accents are a different matter, in fact, probably part of my specific issue with learning to speak probably stems from the matter that I'm somehow "not processing" some of that information. So slight to moderate accents actually stand a decent chance of being missed by me entirely.

And it has to be "not processing" because I maxed out the hearing tests the speech pathologist/child development people performed(although they only tested to "normal" as their concern was checking for hearing impairment/deafness), while also being the only person some Navy Corpsmen have ever seen max out their hearing test--and that includes their medically reviewing Sonar Techs.

Edit: I guess the biggest distinction I make on accent vs impairment is that in the case of impairments, I can "hear the spray of spittle" as they talk. Which is probably a large part of why lisps in particular bother me.

Accents are a different matter, in fact, probably part of my specific issue with learning to speak probably stems from the matter that I'm somehow "not processing" some of that information. So slight to moderate accents actually stand a decent chance of being missed by me entirely.

Understood. My problem apparently was that I was not saying various letter combinations correctly - ou as in sound for example.

Or does it make them feel better?

My question was for the OP, for even those times when it won't make them feel better.
I still see no reason to object if someone tries something that won't help - provided they can be reasonably sure it will do no harm.
That's why I think the frustration evident in the OP is misdirected.

If I was thinking of any kind of reward including a simple thank-you. I always figured I was helping for the wrong reason, and stopped helping.

So retail clerks who are paid to help customers are doing something wrong by helping customers?

A different type of help. I mean if I see someone who needs help such as one of those kids I ran across that were living on the streets for one example. I was referring to all those things we do to help others. It might be as little as holding a door open for a person in a wheel chair as one example. Or helping an elderly lady replace a flat tire on her car. There are many potential helpful acts which are not work related.

Job related helping of customers and fellow employees is entirely different. To some extents that is what a worker is being paid for. Without those customers the business could not afford to pay the workers.

I mean if I see someone who needs help such as one of those kids I ran across that were living on the streets for one example.

Unless your ulterior motive is something actively evil, I don't see why it should matter.

Its not the question of helping. Its the question of motive. Namely in all those circumstances my only motive was to try and help them. I didn't want or expect anything in return, not even a thank-you. Sure the motives relating to a job are different, but even there sometimes you have the option of whether or not to help someone. Whenever I helped someone in need, it was always because it was the right thing to do.

I didn't want or expect anything in return, not even a thank-you.

And so what if you did want something in return? As long as what you want in return isn't evil and you do help, making the person's life better, so what?

I say, refusing to help, just because you have a twinge of desire for a simple "thank you" is not the "right thing to do".

I say, refusing to help, just because you have a twinge of desire for a simple "thank you" is not the "right thing to do".

I agree.
I heard a comment on a TV show recently: "Going to church is like going to the laundromat. You don't go unless you think you have dirty laundry which needs to be cleansed."

I'm an atheist, but I kind of envy those who can believe. They do seem more likely to be happy.

An exception I see is religions which manufacture the "sin" of guilt over desires for things which cause no harm to others. I see that "sin" as an invention by religions intended to keep paying customers coming through the doors.

I say, refusing to help, just because you have a twinge of desire for a simple "thank you" is not the "right thing to do".

Notice I also said its a matter of motives. My main motive has to be to help. Heck I never really refused to help anyone if at all possible. Until recently when I became almost a hermit because of personal problems. Everyone who knew me said I was the original soft-touch, falling for any and all sob stories. Giving the shirt off my back to help them out.

Our chief executive spits out hateful Tweets to anyone who doesn't bow down before him, and the country is about to collapse around us.

Don't despair. He's not competent enough to cause the collapse of your country.

My question of the day is why do they call it a General Election if no Generals are elected

I suspect (with no evidence to support me) that it refers to the populace in general as opposed to a specific election such as an election within a trades union or political party where those authorised to vote are subject to specified conditions such as membership of the body concerned

I suspect (with no evidence to support me) that it refers to the populace in general as opposed to a specific election such as an election within a trades union or political party where those authorised to vote are subject to specified conditions such as membership of the body concerned

Mostly the general population to actually select the person to take an office vs a party specific primaries to select the candidate for that party in the general election.

The terminology is used even in US states with open primaries.

In a closed primary, you have to be a registered member of the party to vote in the primary.

In an open primary, any voter can vote in any parties primary though each voter is generally limited to voting in just one primary.