I just tonight started looking at the Kindle sample I downloaded. A certified denialist would not find it compelling, though, even though it does what it says about validation.
1 Like
Hidden in Plain View?? Very cool. I really enjoyed it. My mind does not work that way, so it is really interesting to see things from another perspective!!
So, herein lies the root of every problematic discussion here, I believe. That people are much more interested in winning arguments than they are of having a discussion and actually learning something. And it’s not just the Faizal’s of the group, it’s everyone, everywhere. I won’t consider that life self-assembled, though I was not there and that’s one of the two valid choices. I won’t consider that the earth is old, even though all of the physical evidence points to it being so. I won’t consider the resurrection of Jesus Christ, though it is reasonable to do so.
It’s a war of attrition here. Whoever can stay focused long enough wins the argument. But the argument has no value. It’s an utter waste of time and energy. So, if you hate a topic enough that you want to expend your valuable time on earth smacking it and its adherents down, you win. If you actually have a life to life and anything of value to do, you get on with it and let this silliness go.
A denialist of anything should not be participating in the discussion, because it violates the definition of the term discussion.
I’d love to see (topic) denialist added to our titles so that we can actually have discussions about certain subjects, instead of throw-downs. If you are a denialist, you can’t participate. Obviously that will never happen, and a denialist, true to his name, will deny that he is one, but it is fun to fantasize about, if only for a moment.
3 Likes
That is your opinion. I see no reason to accept it as true. I do not argue for the sake of arguing. I present the facts and evidence as I see them, and draw the conclusions that I believe follow from these. If someone who comes to a different conclusion is able to produce convincing facts and evidence for his position, then I will change my conclusion. The term for that is “actually learning something.”
If this has not happened in this particular discussion it would not mean I am not here to learn. It would just mean no one here has yet had anything to teach me.
2 Likes
I respect you for saying this. I think that, far too often, many here are so dogmatic that they present their opinions as fact. It manifests itself in this way: No, you are wrong.
My opinion, however, is that you, and many others, do argue for the sake of arguing. I see no desire to dialog and to see anything from another perspective.
Well, again, I’ll disagree with you. This is not “actually learning something” … at least it is not the entirety of it. Learning does not have everything to do with the conclusion to which one comes. Learning is a journey. It’s not just ones and zeros, it is an experience.
You are clearly an intelligent person, but I think that you fool yourself into thinking your purpose for interacting is to learn and dialog. Even in your response here you seem to only see learning as pertaining to the conclusions that you draw and the opinions that you hold.
This is exactly what I mean. You are narrowly defining the educational opportunity to that which varies from your own opinions. There are so many things to learn from those with whom we disagree regarding our conclusions. While what we have to learn may never change our conclusions, it does not mean that we have not learned.
3 Likes
Good points.
4 Likes
Okay, you won me over… 
2 Likes