Is a skeptic missing the compassionate part of their being, while only focusing on logic?

[createdtoworship]

Your preaching is not welcome.

I already live a very good life thanks. No need for religion to alter that.

then why are you on christian forums, if i may ask? If you are not remotely interested or open to it?

 

[VirOptimus]

then why are you on christian forums, if i may ask? If you are not remotely interested or open to it?

because of the (unintentional) humor.

 

[Hans Blaster]

you guys are case and point, perfect examples of the OP. Just humor me and read it, I know that it's really hard to lower yourself and read a monograph that has no indentions, grammatical, and spelling mistakes, but just humor me. But you are a perfect illustration of what I am talking about.

Could you summarize the ethical/moral issue, question, or dilemma?

A quick scan seem to show the OP was mostly about you and seemed to wander all about the place.

 

[Desk trauma]

yes sir I already apologized for the WOT in the OP.

Apologizing does not make the wall of text any less of a wall of text.

If you're looking to get a point across and avoid this discussion of formatting start making use of paragraphs and punctuation.

 

[Amittai]

Here is a good example of what I mean....I was sharing a piece of evidence against abiogenesis, and article and a skeptic on twitter started mocking my position. I never got upset about it, I just used logic and corrected it. But in going logical, I tend to shut off emotion. But this time I turned it back on and politely told her that I loved her and wished her the best soon after. But sometimes the debate does not end so quickly and you are stuck in logic mode for days or weeks and it can take a toll, because all this time you have skeptics that mock, ridicule, and insult. But anyway I know why it happens. There is a logical reason why a skeptic is like that, I have the same problem. But I have the choice to turn on my emotions when I want to, and I am not so sure they have that freedom. But I could be wrong.

View attachment 273498

This is called perseveration and fulfils Godel's theorem of there not being a solution to a problem in a system, within that system. All we need to do is look wider. Most people give clues, if you attune. Sometimes it just means hanging back. People that want to know something, will probably look into it.

Out of politeness I for example answer points raised if I don't think the other side are just nuisance causing (which they rarely are) but I am usually brief about everything else and I usually paraphrase rather than using scripts, because I don't believe in spoonfeeding. When I have to dispute something I am often brief so as to leave the ball in their court which direction they want to go - but that's just me.

If you've got spadefuls of info and want to share it, you can still check out what angle is likely to interest them. One can even ask them that.

The subject of arguing in itself is of course something to argue about. I thought you are - without grovelling - angling for others' additional tips and insights?

 

[Ken-1122]

I debate, and when I debate I have to separate from my emotional side, in order to be logical. That means that posts are factual, yes, but lack compassion. (they are blunt). I used to debate with only emotion, but then I would not see the logical errors of my posts, because I didn't really care about accuracy I cared about everything but. So now when I post, it's normally factual (at least as factual as I can be) But they lack compassion. If I could some how add back the emotion to it, it would be better. But at that point I get too emotional, and lack the factual basis and get really touchy feely without logical bearing. So I can be both, just not at the same time.

Okay; this sounds like a problem you have.

The skeptic however has blocked out the compassionate part of him or her all together.

Here you seem to assume everybody struggles with the same challenges as you. Don’t assume your inability to conflate logic and emotion applies to everyone; particularly skeptics.

 

[Larniavc]

I just know that for me, when I am in debate mode I am very blunt. I pray that I can somehow merge the two, to always be sensitive to others feelings, but right now as it sets. For example I cannot really debate politics. Typically people are offended by my moderate view, so I get enemies on both sides. And when you mix that with bluntness you tend to step on toes. I made a thread once that said..... "democrats vote 40 of 43 for the killing of babies born after abortion." To me it was not a flame, it was not rude, it was not wrong, but I was not thinking of how people who are democrats would see that and be sad over it. Some democrats are not pro abortion (just not many), so it is technically possible that some democrats would not be grouped in with the idea of killing a baby born alive. So while what I said was technically correct, it was not compassionate for those democrats that were prolife. So I was blunt over it, but I was not in a compassionate mode, I was in debate mode. And I actually got in trouble for that thread. So I am just saying for me, I can do one or the other. But typically when I am in debate mode I am not being sensitive toward how others view the data set. I am just focused on proving a point and I don't want to be that way all the time. I desire to be both logical, but also sensitive. It's a real battle. Sometimes I get in debates and I get all worked up, and I have to listen to worship music for like half an hour, to unwind. If not I will be bitter, and mad. But I should not get frustrated, I am frustrated because I am in debate mode and feel somehow that others should follow logic, and when they don't I am offended and embittered. But I am taking it too personal. I should just let it fall as it may. I don't need to convince people of stuff, that is not my job. My job is to love them. And if they disagree with what I say, then that is ok. We can all be different, we don't have to all be the same.

If only debates were more biblical: "be submissive to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good work, to speak evil of no one, to avoid quarreling, to be gentle, and to show perfect courtesy toward all people."
- Titus 3:1-2

How do you get from ‘you’ being blunt when in debate mode to ‘atheists cannot be skeptical and compassionate’?

 

[Larniavc]

I am not really sure I understand intuition very much.

A good way to think of intuition is when you ‘feel’ something is true: as opposed to being able to demonstrate something is true.

 

[Amittai]

fair enough. I am not here to convince you of anything you are not ready to accept. Take care brudda.

This in response to Larnievc is weird.

You are not here to "love" people in the sense of patronise them. True compassion is reasoned. I think we are all puzzled about your OP. Are you asking for constructive suggestions?

You could save yourself lots of work by not always seeing the need to dispute, necessarily. I hope you don't think God is telling you to conduct yourself like that.

Also the manner. Of participants, the worst logic was yours.

I think it is marvellous to have atheists, with wide interests, joining in.

 

[Amittai]

A good way to think of intuition is when you ‘feel’ something is true: as opposed to being able to demonstrate something is true.

Excellent point; I learned to not bother until I've got both of those in place. I also presuppose that I shall NOT be the sole source of demonstrating.

There is even a "logic" TO intuition. It is thoughtfulness and compassion is thoughtfulness not gushingness.

What are the clues telling me about where people are coming from? What would help them? Have I got something that will actually help?

Just for me, thirst for knowledge is something I wish to honour most. I can't plan to "convert" you, outside my neighbourhood, to what might or might not be a religion I myself am only cautiously discerning (as indeed Jesus wanted us to do).

I can't debate unknowns, some of which are your business.

 

[Amittai]

... I thought you are - without grovelling - angling for others' additional tips and insights?

CTW, I've spotted it, you do grovel and bluster (gushingly and patronisingly) both.

I assume you're asking for help. Now here it is. Don't do either. It's of no consequence if people don't get your point and it's of no consequence if you don't bother. Once you realise this, you can look at your information for what it is. You can reword (paraphrase), you can boil it down to its briefest possible, and you can drop an angle and choose a new angle.

Then as we study i) the real meanings of words ii) relationships, we'll make an argument make sense.

And paragraphing is quite easy in both the text portion of as thread and a text file for pasting in. Paragraphs can help an argument progress so you will be less likely to go round in circles.

Worship (part of your screen name) of God is not truly about brownie point hunting.

We don't have to do it perfectly, we can adopt a few practical tips at a time like the rest of us did.

 

[createdtoworship]

Apologizing does not make the wall of text any less of a wall of text.

If you're looking to get a point across and avoid this discussion of formatting start making use of paragraphs and punctuation.

I also addressed this as well, I literally failed out of English class most of my life. I have ADD as well as a basket of other mental illness. As I said. So grammar and formatting are not something that I currently have the ability to do. I apologize. But don't let that hinder you from reading or gleaning from my logical arguments.

 

[createdtoworship]

Okay; this sounds like a problem you have.


Here you seem to assume everybody struggles with the same challenges as you. Don’t assume your inability to conflate logic and emotion applies to everyone; particularly skeptics.

Um, I think it is very common to remove emotion from debate. Even with skeptics. But a christian can calibrate once again later on while the skeptic is stuck in logic mode perpetually and it makes them bitter. I get it, I am trying to show the reason why skeptics can be so belittling. The very first debate I ever had with a skeptic on twitter, was today, she mocked my theism. I was totally nice I told her I loved her as a human being and that I hoped she would be open to talking about it. She replied only with beltitling and saying she was superior to christians in every fashion, which is pride . I could say it was a coincedence, but from my experience it's easier to mock than to actually use bullet points and address the logical arguments of theism.

 

[createdtoworship]

How do you get from ‘you’ being blunt when in debate mode to ‘atheists cannot be skeptical and compassionate’?

See my last post and the OP I spent quite a bit of time developing that. That is why the OP is so long.

 

[Ken-1122]

Um, I think it is very common to remove emotion from debate. Even with skeptics.

I agree! For a lot of people; even skeptics this is the case. But as for myself (a skeptic) this is not the case; I can be emotional and logical at the same time.

But a christian can calibrate once again later on while the skeptic is stuck in logic mode perpetually and it makes them bitter.

Why do you make this assumption? Why would you assume a skeptic that is unable to conflate the two is unable to go back and forth the way the Christian can? What do you think would prevent him?

I get it, I am trying to show the reason why skeptics can be so belittling.

Belligerence, and hostility are human flaws not limited to any group; nobody is immune to such behavior. I’m sure as a Christian you’ve run into plenty of skeptics with these flaws, and as a skeptic I’ve run into many Christians with these flaws. But I would caution against assuming that because you’ve not been on the receiving end of such treatment by Christians that it doesn’t exist. Christians aren’t perfect, they can be as hostile as anyone else.

 

[Larniavc]

See my last post and the OP I spent quite a bit of time developing that. That is why the OP is so long.

I think that you are projecting your limitations onto atheists.

 

[Amittai]

... But a christian can calibrate once again later on while the skeptic is stuck in logic mode perpetually and it makes them bitter. I get it, I am trying to show the reason why skeptics can be so belittling. The very first debate I ever had with a skeptic on twitter, was today, she mocked my theism. I was totally nice I told her I loved her as a human being and that I hoped she would be open to talking about it. She replied only with belittling and saying she was superior to christians in every fashion, which is pride. I could say it was a coincedence, but from my experience it's easier to mock than to actually use bullet points and address the logical arguments of theism.

Right. Let's pull this apart. Bit by bit.

"Twitter". Trouble spot. President Trump doesn't know what he's doing there and you don't know what you are doing there.

Now that you are there, a woman mocked your theism. What does that amount to?

Why not use humour? And the briefer the better.

Why not allude to elements of the discussion being on different bases and then refrain from elaborating.

Now we get to the reddest flag bit. You have no reason to say you hope she will be open to talking about it - it's presumptuous. I'm on her side 100%. You have no reason to say you love her as a human being. That's totally creepy! No it ISN'T "totally nice"!

If you had weilded "being a christian" she is 100% entitled to claim to generalise, she knows that's what she is doing. And no it isn't pride. How offbeam you are in going behind her back to hold her up as an example of that!

Oh yes and she's not bitter AND she's logical as well as intuitive and compassionate.

You use the word "calibrate" but you don't understand in relationships that you is not them and you and them is not us, or what makes a skeptic a skeptic.

Please study how BIG logic is.

Please study how compassion is almost always cool and reserved.

Slow down and think more! Draw diagrams! Look words up in more than one dictionary, especially the lengthy ones!

Brains are individual and we can all invent good management, over time. I can only tell you this this week because I put the effort in. Life is heavy duty for everyone.

If you can't tell anyone anything useful about theism, God doesn't require you to try, please comment on this point.

You come over strongly as a People Pleaser and a brownie point hunter (which God has no doubt stopped doling out to you) and that you will never manage to square anything with anybody. Please research this dangerous trait for the good of your health and the world's.

And the answer to perseverating is, break off abruptly, smile at yourself and get back to all the rest of your hobbies. How few hobbies have you got? This is an ethical and moral matter!

I sincerely hope you don't use a screen name similar in tone to "created to worship" which isn't an individual. If you said "Bongo worshipper" that is less of a problem because not many people worship that god, a stray one can be known as that. Not saying what you worship looks like a begged question, implying there is supposed to be a superior answer.

Do you come from a pushy and shallow denomination?

Please attend to your individuality.

 

[Amittai]

I also addressed this as well, I literally failed out of English class most of my life. I have ADD as well as a basket of other mental illness. As I said. So grammar and formatting are not something that I currently have the ability to do. I apologize. But don't let that hinder you from reading or gleaning from my logical arguments.

I had traumas in classes and have had to make up my deficits in oblique ways.

When I found out about my own specific learning differences, including my own ADD, I was overjoyed to embrace a wonderful book:

You mean I'm not lazy, stupid or crazy

by Kate Kelly and Peggy Ramundo

pubd 1993

Fireside edition 1996

It's chock full of insights & hints on all subjects.

I for one understand limitations, workarounds do take creativity. When we are short of energy, we should slow down. Then "your logical arguments" will gain better logic. Don't forget logic is big.

Look for the layers in things, develop spatial thinking.

 

[Amittai]

... I was sharing a piece of evidence against abiogenesis, and article and a skeptic on twitter started mocking my position.

...

There is a logical reason why a skeptic is like that, I have the same problem. But I have the choice to turn on my emotions when I want to, and I am not so sure they have that freedom. But I could be wrong.

View attachment 273498

I've got interested in the sciences, again. Now there are lots of discussions in books I found, second hand, in charity shops, and in books I borrowed at the library (I'm learning to take notes), about the origins of life forms and the origins of the universe, the nature of time, and the like. There is a lot of discussion about the propensity of matter to unfurl in certain ways. You could major on the hypotheses of different authors and then point out, as if of little relevance, that incidentally some theists thought it accorded with their view. God wouldn't and doesn't approve of more. He is not supported thereby!

Don't jump guns. The wonders of science are the wonders of science. They have to be appreciated for themselves.

God wants you to represent you, not Him, then eventually you will show that the fact that you are you is important to Him.

God wants you to represent science (to the degree you are familiar with it), then eventually it will appear science is important to Him.

Acting like a cipher in the name of God confirms that God is only interested in ciphers.

Right. Everyone is freely emotional at all times, your debating partners AND you. It's not logical of you to rationalise your illogic and then pinning it on the others.

It took me a lifetime of pain to gain confidence in my personality and individuality.

 

[Amittai]

... and to get loved on by the body of Christ. ... Once I had that, I noticed all my bitterness was gone and forgiveness and love was possible.

- be wary of manipulativeness in churches
- we have to embrace slowness and sadness
- you didn't have to forgive anyone. Think of it as an over-boisterous dog jumping on you in the street. It doesn't mean anything