Law1 min ago
Ideology Is The Enemy Of Reason
55 Answers
True or false?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Hypognosis, // Oh great. Once again, Naomi won't spell out the detail of the contradictions//
Won’t? Once again? I haven’t been asked. When was the last time I refused, upon request, to spell out contradictions?
Here you are:
//Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness… Genesis 1.26
Thus the heavens and the earth were completed in all their vast array. By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work. Genesis 2.1/2
…there was no one to work the ground… Genesis 2.5
Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground… Genesis 2.7//
Spot the mistake in the official story.
Won’t? Once again? I haven’t been asked. When was the last time I refused, upon request, to spell out contradictions?
Here you are:
//Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness… Genesis 1.26
Thus the heavens and the earth were completed in all their vast array. By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work. Genesis 2.1/2
…there was no one to work the ground… Genesis 2.5
Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground… Genesis 2.7//
Spot the mistake in the official story.
@naomi
//Won’t? Once again? I haven’t been asked. //
The need for an interjection to ask for detail did not arise until after you'd launched into Theland, regarding these contradictions. Okay, I could have phrased it better, like "wait up: what contradictions do you mean?" but I reacted in a sulky "oh no, not again" way. Press 'submit' in haste; repent at leisure.
And what if there were several contradictions in Genesis and Theland was aware of all of them? Is he expected to have to type them up, for the benefit of the thread, until you nod and say "that one"?
//When was the last time I refused, upon request, to spell out contradictions? //
Again, not a refusal when asked, by any means, but another case of challenging the other debater to acknowledge "the contradictions" - in the gospels, that time - and expecting everyone following the thread to be aware of all of these, intimately, like it is supposed to be common knowledge. That time, even your co-respondent needed helpful pointers, to know where you were coming from.
I'm calling this the "sorry, we're not psychic" defence.
Think Victoria Wood, sweet trolley sketch.
//Won’t? Once again? I haven’t been asked. //
The need for an interjection to ask for detail did not arise until after you'd launched into Theland, regarding these contradictions. Okay, I could have phrased it better, like "wait up: what contradictions do you mean?" but I reacted in a sulky "oh no, not again" way. Press 'submit' in haste; repent at leisure.
And what if there were several contradictions in Genesis and Theland was aware of all of them? Is he expected to have to type them up, for the benefit of the thread, until you nod and say "that one"?
//When was the last time I refused, upon request, to spell out contradictions? //
Again, not a refusal when asked, by any means, but another case of challenging the other debater to acknowledge "the contradictions" - in the gospels, that time - and expecting everyone following the thread to be aware of all of these, intimately, like it is supposed to be common knowledge. That time, even your co-respondent needed helpful pointers, to know where you were coming from.
I'm calling this the "sorry, we're not psychic" defence.
Think Victoria Wood, sweet trolley sketch.
@naomi
(back to page 1)
//Regardless of rationally irrefutable argument those who embrace any particular brand of ideology, whether political or religious, do not appear to be amenable to entertaining any idea that falls outside the scope of their beliefs. They are completely inflexible.//
Soviet Communism was a case in point: it solved two questions
1) How do we get rid of this horrible Tsar and his cronies? We outnumber them, hundreds to one and it'll be a doddle.
2) How do we keep ourselves housed, clothed and fed after we've toppled the elite?
It then ossified in that post revolutionary state and then, because a command structure is needed for a territory that big, it was inevitable that a pseudo-Tsar and croneyism were going to re-emerge.
Scratch an idealist revolutionary, find an aspiring Tsar.
(I'm paraphrasing a quote that I cannot recall the source of).
(back to page 1)
//Regardless of rationally irrefutable argument those who embrace any particular brand of ideology, whether political or religious, do not appear to be amenable to entertaining any idea that falls outside the scope of their beliefs. They are completely inflexible.//
Soviet Communism was a case in point: it solved two questions
1) How do we get rid of this horrible Tsar and his cronies? We outnumber them, hundreds to one and it'll be a doddle.
2) How do we keep ourselves housed, clothed and fed after we've toppled the elite?
It then ossified in that post revolutionary state and then, because a command structure is needed for a territory that big, it was inevitable that a pseudo-Tsar and croneyism were going to re-emerge.
Scratch an idealist revolutionary, find an aspiring Tsar.
(I'm paraphrasing a quote that I cannot recall the source of).
Latest Posts
Film, Media & TV10 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles18 mins ago
ChatterBank42 mins ago
Assisted Dying, Here's Where It...
News46 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.