Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Nevertheless, I believe both books* were inspired by the same author.
* The Struggle for Life and My Struggle.
Darwin had two theories that he thought worked in concert. The first was a theory that postulated through mutations that new genetic information was being added to life forms continuously. The second thesis was that because these differences would also differ in survivability, those that were unsuited would become extinct. To him this represented a continuing "upward" evolution of life.
The second theory seems supported by evidence that we are losing genetic information as species become extinct.
However in the 150 years since Darwin first presented his ideas, no one has observed a favorable mutation in a plant or animal. Mutations do occur such as with cancer and tumors. However, for a favorable mutation one would need millions of coincidental changes to all take place at the same time and in a reproductive cell so that those changes could be passed on.
Questions:So is this your next move? To misname both books and then imply satanic authorship?
No. For that was the title. The part "by means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life" was the subtitle, as can be seen on the front page of it's first edition.Questions:
1. Do you misname The Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life when you call it, The Origin of Species?
I am inclined to say that it depends on the context. If it is done in a longer text, where the full title has been used previously, I would say no.2. Do you misname The Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life when you call it, Origins?
Agan, I would say that it depends on the context. For historical reasons, Mein Kampf is always referred to by it's German title. As is Marx' Das Kapital. Proust's A la rechereche du temps perdu is always referred to in French, etc.3. Do you misname a foreign book when you call it by its English title?
Men do exist. Neither Satan nor god exist.4. When you step down the authorship of the Bible from God to man; is it okay if I step down the authorship of a couple of books from man to Satan?
Do you really think for one minute people blow a gasket when I ... ahem ... "misquote" those titles, that they're [um] sincerely [/um] upset that I'm disrespecting context?I am inclined to say that it depends on the context. If it is done in a longer text, where the full title has been used previously, I would say no.
Agan, I would say that it depends on the context. For historical reasons, Mein Kampf is always referred to by it's German title. As is Marx' Das Kapital. Proust's A la rechereche du temps perdu is always referred to in French, etc.
I am anyways.Do you really think for one minute people blow a gasket when I ... ahem ... "misquote" those titles, that they're [um] sincerely [/um] upset that I'm disrespecting context?
Seriously?
Kinda like calling miracles "magic," isn't it?I am anyways.
It's a cheap and silly trick.
It sincerely reflects poorly on yourself that you have to use such childish rhetoric device.
Deflection is equally a childish rhetoric device.Kinda like calling miracles "magic," isn't it?
As long as you miss the point, you can call it anything you want.Deflection is equally a childish rhetoric device.
I don't think they would be upset, but only because they won't value the views of someone who uses such devices.Do you really think for one minute people blow a gasket when I ... ahem ... "misquote" those titles, that they're [um] sincerely [/um] upset that I'm disrespecting context?
Well, as I pointed out, it's okay for them to shorten the title, even to the point of changing one word from singular to plural.I don't think they would be upset, but only because they won't value the views of someone who uses such devices.
But you only do it to troll.Well, as I pointed out, it's okay for them to shorten the title, even to the point of changing one word from singular to plural.
But let someone outside their fold do it, even to mock it, and they blow a fuse.
And what do you troll?But you only do it to troll.
Then I don't either.I dont troll.
I don't care. They can read yours too. And there are different ways to troll (or not to troll).We can read your posts you know.
I don't care. They can read yours too. And there are different ways to troll (or not to troll).
You wanna see me bounce my post count up by about 100 in 5 minutes or less?If your forum figures are accurate then you've been posting on average one post every minute for the last 15 years. Now you've either got an incredibly large store of worthwhile things to write about. Or there's some trolling been going on there.
From my short time on the forum I'd suggest it's not the former.
You wanna see me bounce my post count up by about 100 in 5 minutes or less?
If so, I haven't done it in a couple years, but I'll give it a good try.
In the meantime, let's cease with the trolling accusations, okay?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?