Of course. Look it up. You would have to be gullible to not verify, and you would have to either be from another planet, dishonest, oblivious, or an iconizer of words to have not noticed the liberal bias of the media on your own. It’s thick enough to choke a horse.uwot, more or less wrote:Got any proof?
Is the concept of ''Atheist'' necessary, let alone real?
Re: Is the concept of ''Atheist'' necessary, let alone real?
Re: Is the concept of ''Atheist'' necessary, let alone real?
To be truly an oak means to be more than an acorn. To be human means to be more than a potential human. Acorns and potential humans get insulted but that's life.
Re: Is the concept of ''Atheist'' necessary, let alone real?
The ravings of a mad woman or just representative of a quality of understanding the secular world struggles against?"There are two atheisms of which one is a purification of the notion of God.
Perhaps every evil thing has a second aspect—a purification in the course of progress towards the good—and a third which is the higher good.
We have to distinguish carefully between these three aspects because it is very dangerous for thought and for the effective conduct of life to confuse them." ~ Simone Weil
Re: Is the concept of ''Atheist'' necessary, let alone real?
An animal cannot transcend its animal limitations.
A human can transcend its human limitations.
That’s the advantage of a human birth.
What are human limitations?
Ignorance caused by desire, leading to attachment and suffering.
Humans can even transcend modern notions of liberalism to see the light.
Thus, humans become more than human.
(Although often, less is more.)
Re: Is the concept of ''Atheist'' necessary, let alone real?
Re: Is the concept of ''Atheist'' necessary, let alone real?
Thus spake the "more than human" displaying his great maturity, understanding and depth. Noted.Reflex wrote: ↑Mon May 21, 2018 3:31 amNick, it's obvious that most people here have about as much insight as a wart.
Re: Is the concept of ''Atheist'' necessary, let alone real?
And well it should be. You might learn something.
Re: Is the concept of ''Atheist'' necessary, let alone real?
Re: Is the concept of ''Atheist'' necessary, let alone real?
Ok, I did. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_bia ... ted_States
In these days, when you can communicate with complete strangers anywhere in the world, it takes a special type of idiot to assume that their own country is representative of the entire planet.
Well, from what I read, in the USA you either have to be very selective with the data to conclude as you do; you uncritically believe everything that demonstrably right wing media outlets tell you, or your own views are so extreme that Adolf Hitler is mainstream by comparison.
Re: Is the concept of ''Atheist'' necessary, let alone real?
Humour stopped being funny when you were 12, Reflex? That explains a lot.
Re: Is the concept of ''Atheist'' necessary, let alone real?
Then they're not limitations.
Ha! Ignorance is caused by laziness. It is the most easily cured of human afflictions, but some people cannot or will not risk finding out anything that will cause their flabby arsed brain to think.
That is not some Zen koan, Walker; sometimes gibberish is just gibberish.
Re: Is the concept of ''Atheist'' necessary, let alone real?
Alien from another planet is gaining steam.uwot wrote: ↑Mon May 21, 2018 8:27 amThen they're not limitations.
Another sui generis definition.Ha! Ignorance is caused by laziness. It is the most easily cured of human afflictions, but some people cannot or will not risk finding out anything that will cause their flabby arsed brain to think.
What causes laziness, and is it measured by effort or results?That is not some Zen koan, Walker; sometimes gibberish is just gibberish.
“Less is more” is a well-known human principle that nimbly skips from situation to situation.
Examples: Gary Cooper’s acting. Jesus Christ’s words. A meditator’s thoughts. Distracting noise. Observations and commentary. Advice. Gift packages. Steven Wright’s jokes. Sunday School before AC. A dimensionless point from which a universe of mass instantaneously appears. The usual etc.
In the phrase less is more, “less” refers to quantity, whilst “more” refers to quality.
I thought everyone knew that.
Re: Is the concept of ''Atheist'' necessary, let alone real?
Have you forgotten already?
You can attach whatever meanings to words that please you, but you will limit the number of people who understand you.
That, Walker, is a sui generis definition. Personally I'm happy to stick with a definition according to which if you exceed what you thought was a limit, you were ignorant of what the limit is.
Dunno. You have more experience in this; what do you reckon?
I was referring to the "humans become more than human" bit.