Skip to main content

View Diary: I am a fundamentalist (278 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Which is exactly what all ideology does, (0+ / 0-)

    even empirical induction, because only empirical induction and logic is accepted in the closed and fundamentalist system of empirical induction.

    There can be no challenge to the one and true God/Church/State/Power and only God/Chruch/State/Power can make revisions.

    Your ideology is inauthentic.

    At least I admit to my own fundamentalism.

    "What is the robbing of a Bank compared to the FOUNDING of a Bank?" Bertolt Brecht

    by thethinveil on Wed May 05, 2010 at 02:13:51 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Inisting that others share your mindset (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Lonely Texan

      is the manifestation of a closed mind. You have, indeed, demonstrated your own fundamentalism.

      Simply asserting that all others are fundamentalist as well is not proof of anything.

      Since you reject a priori the notion of logical proof (yet continually attempt to use it to prove your point), there is no basis for your imputation of beliefs to others.

      If your own fundamentalism does not include even the simplest principle of not presuming to speak for all others nor presuming to be the only person to know the true truth about the world, it is trivial for me to argue that it is self-contradictory, invalid by any thought system but your own, and counterproductive.

      It certainly is useless as far as making any predictions about the world.

      In fact, your use of sentences in logical constructs undermines you own premise.

      This has been fun, but useless.

      Ultimately, you have derailed the conversation into a fruitless sophist exercise, whose only purpose seem to hypocritically tell all others they have no grounds to challenge any of your assertions, while you reserve to yourself the right to challenge everyone else's assertions.

      If you actually argue this in your everyday life, it must be a lonely world indeed.

      Always make new mistakes - Esther Dyson

      by RandomActsOfReason on Wed May 05, 2010 at 02:48:55 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Here talking to you buddy, (0+ / 0-)

        I have been trying to recommend you actually read elsewhere for the roots of this sophistry, your sophistry.

        "What is the robbing of a Bank compared to the FOUNDING of a Bank?" Bertolt Brecht

        by thethinveil on Wed May 05, 2010 at 03:13:02 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Presuming that others have not read something (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Lonely Texan

          because they differ with your beliefs is more manifestation of your dogmatic thinking, not evidence of the ignorance of others.

          It is also a fallacious form of argumentation.

          Since you reject the notion that logic is valid, there is no point in even having a discussion. You make a claim based on logical principles, yet when the logical flaws in your argument are revealed, you claim to reject logic.

          That is mere sophistry, and I have encountered the mentality many times in debates with Creationists. You apparently think you have discovered something new and wonderful, because a college professor assigned to it impressive sounding multi-syllabic words.

          It is a tired old philosophy that was dealt with in ancient Greece, and discarded because it is sterile, impotent and useless. It leads nowhere.

          And none of it sheds any light on the questionable values this diary promotes, nor the critiques presented to them.

          Always make new mistakes - Esther Dyson

          by RandomActsOfReason on Wed May 05, 2010 at 03:23:49 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I know the discussion is tiresome, (0+ / 0-)

            its why I haven't put much effort into this discussion, made my responses short, I didn't comment in the original diary.

            It is very very old. TINS opened it, and I was never really interested in discussing it.

            "What is the robbing of a Bank compared to the FOUNDING of a Bank?" Bertolt Brecht

            by thethinveil on Wed May 05, 2010 at 04:04:42 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Simpler version: you could simply be wrong (0+ / 0-)

      your argument could be erroneous and your logic whatever it is, flawed.

      Your dogma could be incorrect. It could be you who is inauthentic.

      Yet you presume to tell all others that they are wrong.

      Your philosophy is self-defeating. If not wrong, it is at least useless.

      Since you yourself do not actually practice what you preach, your credibility is nil in any case.

      Always make new mistakes - Esther Dyson

      by RandomActsOfReason on Wed May 05, 2010 at 02:52:01 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I am not preaching it, (0+ / 0-)

        the funny thing is that you and TINS ARE.

        "What is the robbing of a Bank compared to the FOUNDING of a Bank?" Bertolt Brecht

        by thethinveil on Wed May 05, 2010 at 03:11:22 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Preaching what? (0+ / 0-)

          I came to this diary questioning the choice of the commonly understood word "fundamentalist" and "sacred" referring to text, in the light of the real-world consequences of the real-world use of those mindsets as commonly understood in the real world, including entrenchment, hostility, and, ultimately violence and hate.

          I suggested alternatives that are less divisive and can create the foundation (note the critical distinction) for common ground.

          I asked clarifying questions which were not answered, and I challenged an absolutist position that most definitely was preaching. (It is ironic, by the way, that you don't apply the "preaching" critique to the diarist, given the contents of the diary).

          You have responded with sophistry and straw men, and efforts to entangle others in utterly irrelevant discussions that shed no light on the subject of this diary nor my critique.

          I am not the one writing a diary proudly proclaiming fundamentalism. Hard to see how I am "preaching".

          But then, you seem to use words in your own way, ignoring their common meaning, so perhaps your sympathy with the diarist is understandable.

          Always make new mistakes - Esther Dyson

          by RandomActsOfReason on Wed May 05, 2010 at 03:20:15 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (151)
  • Community (65)
  • Elections (43)
  • Civil Rights (38)
  • 2016 (32)
  • Culture (32)
  • Baltimore (28)
  • Economy (27)
  • Environment (27)
  • Texas (27)
  • Bernie Sanders (27)
  • Law (27)
  • Hillary Clinton (24)
  • Labor (23)
  • Rescued (21)
  • Health Care (21)
  • Barack Obama (20)
  • Republicans (19)
  • International (18)
  • Freddie Gray (17)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site