""What is more threatening, a world of unicorns, Care Bears and guardian angels or an otherwise indifferent world in which it is we who collectively make a difference?""
the latter, obviously.
many humans r dangerous.
""It seems members have never learnt any particular thing here.""
ive learned not to mess with stuff i dont understand and that things rnt always the way they seem to be.
""From my perspective this forum is part of the peanut gallery in the context of Freemasonry. It is among the worst offenders as it is open to the public, run by Freemasons, under the banner of Freemasonry and permits no right of reply.""
i find that children often ask interesting questions. far as im concerned, all of freemasonry and the rest of the world is the peanut gallery. u included.
""the irrelevant argument has been put here that believers are happier than skeptics.""
its not irrelevant to those who put happiness over the search for truth. (i wouldnt)
"" wilfully ignorant and anti-intellectual""
cool it, bro.. im posting here.
> ""What is more threatening, a world of unicorns, Care Bears and guardian angels or an otherwise indifferent world in which it is we who collectively make a difference?""
>>the latter, obviously. many humans r dangerous.
Thank you, that was my point. Read the post to which I was responding.
> ""It seems members have never learnt any particular thing here.""
>> ive learned not to mess with stuff i dont understand and that things rnt always the way they seem to be.
Thank you, you have given a further example of that point. What particular "stuff", what "things"?
> ""the irrelevant argument has been put here that believers are happier than skeptics.""
>> its not irrelevant to those who put happiness over the search for truth. (i wouldnt)
Thank you, that was my point.
>"" wilfully ignorant and anti-intellectual""
>> cool it, bro.. im posting here.
What is your point?
if we r agreeing on points and u do not consider yourself wilfully ignorant nor anti-intellectual, my point ought to be clear.
""My suspicion is that excessive rationality is actually driven by a need for security of belief. If self-image is the highest possession of a human then any undermining of self-image - for example casting doubt on core beliefs - is likely to produce a severe reaction, from name-calling to purification by fire.""
although i dont agree with the terminology, the core message (imo) holds water:
a dogmatic worldview is a blanket against the (feared) unknown. to question this particular worldview leads to severe resistance.
""What particular "stuff"""
stuff i have no personal experience in or stuff that appears illogical but cant be easily proven "wrong" or "right".
""what "things"?""
things like:
""It seems members have never learnt any particular thing here.""
seems not.
>> if we r agreeing on points and u do not consider yourself wilfully ignorant nor anti-intellectual, my point ought to be clear.
Whether or not your point ought to be clear, it is not. What is your point in posting "cool it, bro.. im posting here."?
>Paul> ""My suspicion is that excessive rationality is actually driven by a need for security of belief. If self-image is the highest possession of a human then any undermining of self-image - for example casting doubt on core beliefs - is likely to produce a severe reaction, from name-calling to purification by fire.""
>>although i dont agree with the terminology, the core message (imo) holds water:
a dogmatic worldview is a blanket against the (feared) unknown. to question this particular worldview leads to severe resistance.
>Smithee> What is more threatening, a world of unicorns, Care Bears and guardian angels or an otherwise indifferent world in which it is we who collectively make a difference?
>mgc> the latter, obviously. many humans r dangerous.
> ""What particular "stuff"""
>> stuff i have no personal experience in or stuff that appears illogical but cant be easily proven "wrong" or "right".
What particular "stuff"?
> ""what "things"?""
>>things like:
>Smithee> ""It seems members have never learnt any particular thing here.""
>>seems not.
Thank you.