How did you change paradigm?

So what's really going on?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: How did you change paradigm?

Post by Skepdick »

Trajk Logik wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:04 pm
Skepdick wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 2:53 pm
It means fuckall. It's just different vocabularies for different identities. I know that.

I can speak like an atheist. I can speak like a theist. I can speak like an agnostic.

But people who don't know how to think don't understand that, so they protect their narrative and their identity from attack.
But when you speak like an atheist or theist, do you actually mean it? What about speaking like an agnostic?
I don't understand the question. If you speak like a Frenchman; or Spaniard; or Italian do you actually mean it?

I am just expressing myself using a different framing

I still get to say the same things, about the same reality. Relaying the same human emotions, desires, commands etc.
I am just using a different language.
Trajk Logik wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:04 pm Can you speak like you believe in unicorns?
Stick me in a group of unicornists and I'll learn their language soon enough.
Trajk Logik wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:04 pm How is that different than speaking like you are a theist?
How is French different to Russian? What sort of answer do you expect to such a question?
Trajk Logik wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:04 pm If you are not a theist and not a believer in unicorns (because you are an agnostic in both) then you don't actually believe what you are saying.
I have no idea what "believing in what you are saying" even means. I use language to express myself. I have a reason for expressing myself. Usually the reason is because I need something from other humans; or they need something from me.

Whether I am expressing myself speaking to a theist; atheist or a unicornist - my reason for expressing myself doesn't go away.
Language is a tool. We use it to communicate with other humans in order to navigate reality and achieve goals.

The entire philosophical language game of "getting reality right" is horseshit; and so is the "does X exist?" game.

Quite settled it for me. What exists? Everything.
Trajk Logik wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:04 pm How can I make any judgement on the existence of something that has not been consistently defined?
In what sort of situation does the question of "existence" pop up? What sort of person is asking you? In what sort of context? For what sort of reason?

The only time I've ever been encountered the language game of "what exists" and "what doesn't exist" is when intellectual infants are still learning how to think. Can they play the usual one-upmanship game of ridiculing each other.

Yeah, my son believes in Santa - he has very good reason to. He saw Santa - Santa brought him gifts.
The fact that it was me dressed up as Santa seems like a minor and unimportant detail?

My son is recounting his experience of (somebody pretending to be) Santa.

It's not like somebody has pulled the wool over his eyes and swindled him out of his most priceless posession.
Trajk Logik wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:04 pm What if I, and others, told you that Darkmeflarb exists?
Again. In what context would this sort of sentence come up with. What if I told you the pimple on my ass exists?
Trajk Logik wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:04 pm Do you need to know what Darkmeflarb is before asserting whether or not you believe, not believe, or just don't know if it exists?
Why do you care about my beliefs in the first place anyway? "Beliefs" are just a manner of speaking. They are a meta-narrative.

It doesn't usually matter what you believe if you know how to think.
Trajk Logik wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:04 pm Would you bother asking what a Darkmeflarb is?
Depends on the context of the conversation.
Trajk Logik wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:04 pm And if you did and you received different answers from different people, how would that affect what you believe
I don't think beliefs work like that. WHY I believe matters. WHAT I believe does not.
Trajk Logik wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:04 pm how would you receiving different answers to your question be any different than you never asking what a Darkmeflarb is? Would you still assert that there is no evidence either way? How is that any different than simply finding no use in my claims and going on about your life as if I had never said anything at all?
Spur of the moment. If I understood what the person is saying and I cared to engage. And I had something to say and a reason to say it - I would.
Last edited by Skepdick on Tue Jan 24, 2023 4:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Belinda
Posts: 8030
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: How did you change paradigm?

Post by Belinda »

I think there is often a cascade of belief changes at the onset of puberty. In some societies the onset of puberty is marked by ceremonies.
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6591
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: How did you change paradigm?

Post by Iwannaplato »

Belinda wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 4:46 pm I think there is often a cascade of belief changes at the onset of puberty.
One could also say a whole set of things suddenly become important to have beliefs about. You may not have had a hypothesis about what gets you sex, respect from alpha peers, a good junior high reputation, etc., but suddenly you'll be laying bets.
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: How did you change paradigm?

Post by Skepdick »

Iwannaplato wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 4:48 pm
Belinda wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 4:46 pm I think there is often a cascade of belief changes at the onset of puberty.
One could also say a whole set of things suddenly become important to have beliefs about. You may not have had a hypothesis about what gets you sex, respect from alpha peers, a good junior high reputation, etc., but suddenly you'll be laying bets.
Now those kinds of beliefs are about how reality works/behaves. They aren't the kind of beliefs about "what exists".

They are the sort of thing where you attempt to anticipate outcomes based on your own behaviour.

But then once you develop a model for the sort of interactions you care about that's probably implicit knowledge that you simply can't make explicit.

Teaching intuitions is hard.
User avatar
Trajk Logik
Posts: 353
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2016 12:35 pm

Re: How did you change paradigm?

Post by Trajk Logik »

Skepdick wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 4:16 pm If you speak like a Frenchman; or Spaniard; or Italian do you actually mean it?
Depends on what you're talking about. If you're talking about being a Frenchman, Spaniard or Italian, then yes. If you're a Frenchman talking about being a Spaniard, could it even be possible for you to mean it? Words are about things. There's a difference between knowing what you're talking about and just mimicking sounds or scribbles you hear and see. You seem to be saying that you're doing the latter. In other words you never say anything about anything.
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: How did you change paradigm?

Post by Skepdick »

Trajk Logik wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 5:16 pm
Skepdick wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 4:16 pm If you speak like a Frenchman; or Spaniard; or Italian do you actually mean it?
Depends on what you're talking about. If you're talking about being a Frenchman, Spaniard or Italian, then yes. If you're a Frenchman talking about being a Spaniard, could it even be possible for you to mean it? Words are about things. There's a difference between knowing what you're talking about and just mimicking sounds or scribbles you hear and see. You seem to be saying that you're doing the latter. In other words you never say anything about anything.
It doesn't matter what I am talking ABOUT. What matters is WHY I am talking about whatever it is that I am talking about.

I could say "I am being a Frenchman" sarcastically (I've lived in france 15 years - I might as well be french)
I could say "I am being a Spaniard" meaning "Yeah, I have Spanish citizenship. As well as Italian citizenship."

Language is incredibly flexible in this regard. The message matters far more than the actual words used.

There's no need for the level of precision you demand. Language is incredibly imprecise and fuzzy and approximate. And it works just fine.
Belinda
Posts: 8030
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: How did you change paradigm?

Post by Belinda »

Skepdick wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 4:49 pm
Iwannaplato wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 4:48 pm
Belinda wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 4:46 pm I think there is often a cascade of belief changes at the onset of puberty.
One could also say a whole set of things suddenly become important to have beliefs about. You may not have had a hypothesis about what gets you sex, respect from alpha peers, a good junior high reputation, etc., but suddenly you'll be laying bets.
Now those kinds of beliefs are about how reality works/behaves. They aren't the kind of beliefs about "what exists".

They are the sort of thing where you attempt to anticipate outcomes based on your own behaviour.


But then once you develop a model for the sort of interactions you care about that's probably implicit knowledge that you simply can't make explicit.

Teaching intuitions is hard.
I wonder if one's chosen theory of existence is chosen with the unconscious motive of rationalising intuitions learned in childhood and adulthood. For instance, how else could any post-enlightenment man chose to believe in substance dualism?
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: How did you change paradigm?

Post by Skepdick »

Belinda wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 5:50 pm I wonder if one's chosen theory of existence is chosen with the unconscious motive of rationalising intuitions learned in childhood and adulthood. For instance, how else could any post-enlightenment man chose to believe in substance dualism?
I think the whole vocabulary of "believe in" disappears as one explores a bunch of perspectives.

You spot the patterns between the opposing world-views and you abstract those into general principles. The usual thesis/antithesys/synthesis stuff. And then the cycle continues.

One could even use the philosophical positions for mere discursive purposes. Some times it's more useful to be a monist, sometimes it's more useful to be a dualist to drive the point home.

Don't think of your philosophical knowledge as anything other than a resource to be exploited for effective communication.
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: How did you change paradigm?

Post by Skepdick »

bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:19 pm
Skepdick wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 12:28 pm
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 11:33 am For example my belief in God. I was Muslim first. Reading through Koran and discussing it with other people I had some doubts while I was still a believer. I hold on to both belief and doubt. I then tend to believe in Christianity. I then found an argument against Omniscient God. Later I found an argument against the act of creation from nothing. So I left Christianity aside. I refine my argument by discussing it with people here and there. So now, I found a foundation that I can stand on. So I am an atheist. No need to say I still believe in God/Gods who can create humans from something, or at least I have no argument against it yet. Well, if you think about it, if humans can be the by-product of evolution which is a random process that takes billions of years then how come a super-intelligent being with magnificent knowledge cannot create humans from something?
Oi vei! You too have fallen into the trap of ambiguous language - that loaded phrase "believe in". Let me land a helping hand.

Do you believe in democracy?
Yes and no. It depends on how well-educated are the people.
There's no need to be contrarian here. Assume the most rational argument... But i'll paraphrase in context...

Do you believe in educating the people?
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:19 pm Yes, as I believe in hate.
Are you saying you believe that hate exists, or are you saying that you believe in promulgating hate?

The point I am trying to drive here is that "to believe in something" is to say "I want to bring about more of this upon the world".

It's good - lets have more of it!
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:19 pm When I say that I believe in God I mean that I have faith that God exists.
OK, but this ontological commitment is not useful. What's the implication of God's existence? What would be different if God didn't exist?

Ignore ontology - it doesn't matter if God exists or not.

What matters is whether you believe we should manifest God into existence.
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:19 pm When I say that I don't think that God exists I mean that I have a reason against God.
Why would anyone have reasons against The Greatest Good?
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:19 pm Well, when I say I don't think that God exists I mean that God is not an ontological thing.
I know, but the ontological God is a useless idea. Whether he exists or not - nothing different happens in practice!
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:19 pm I don't. It is either real or not.
Yeah. Ontological Gods are not useful! I don't care if god is real or not!

I care about the epistemic God. The idea not the ontology.
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:19 pm Of course, they are different in belief.
No, they aren't. They are different in vocabulary - they are practically indistinguishable in behaviour.
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:19 pm I disagree. I follow my own way that I think is right.
How different is "your own way" from society's way?
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:19 pm Metaphorically? What does stoning people to death mean metaphorically?
It means that they stoned people to death. Literally. Take your lesson from it. Draw a moral from the story and move on.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: How did you change paradigm?

Post by bahman »

Skepdick wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 7:12 pm
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:19 pm
Skepdick wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 12:28 pm
Oi vei! You too have fallen into the trap of ambiguous language - that loaded phrase "believe in". Let me land a helping hand.

Do you believe in democracy?
Yes and no. It depends on how well-educated are the people.
There's no need to be contrarian here. Assume the most rational argument... But i'll paraphrase in context...

Do you believe in educating the people?
Sure, it is through education that people learn how to properly live.
Skepdick wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 7:12 pm
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:19 pm Yes, as I believe in hate.
Are you saying you believe that hate exists, or are you saying that you believe in promulgating hate?
No, I am saying that hate exists and it is important. There is no reason to be ashamed when you hate.
Skepdick wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 7:12 pm The point I am trying to drive here is that "to believe in something" is to say "I want to bring about more of this upon the world".

It's good - lets have more of it!
Hate is Evil. We have to be fair when we want to hate as we have to be fair when we want to love.
Skepdick wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 7:12 pm
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:19 pm When I say that I believe in God I mean that I have faith that God exists.
OK, but this ontological commitment is not useful.
They are important. See following.
Skepdick wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 7:12 pm What's the implication of God's existence?
Well, God is supreme, Omniscient for example, if exists. If God says to do X and not do Y based on His/Her Omniscience then I should better follow His/Hers command. There must be a good reason to do X and not do Y since He/She is Omniscient and I am not.
Skepdick wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 7:12 pm What would be different if God didn't exist?
God is Omniscient so He/she can teach people the proper way of living otherwise we have to learn things through trial and error.
Skepdick wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 7:12 pm Ignore ontology - it doesn't matter if God exists or not.
It is important.
Skepdick wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 7:12 pm What matters is whether you believe we should manifest God into existence.
What do you mean by manifesting God into existence?
Skepdick wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 7:12 pm
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:19 pm When I say that I don't think that God exists I mean that I have a reason against God.
Why would anyone have reasons against The Greatest Good?
The Greatest Evil also. It matters since we have to know whether we should follow the scriptures literally or not.
Skepdick wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 7:12 pm
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:19 pm Well, when I say I don't think that God exists I mean that God is not an ontological thing.
I know, but the ontological God is a useless idea. Whether he exists or not - nothing different happens in practice!
It is not a useless idea as I described in previous comments.
Skepdick wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 7:12 pm
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:19 pm I don't. It is either real or not.
Yeah. Ontological Gods are not useful! I don't care if god is real or not!
I care. I am not Omniscient so I follow the command of Omniscient.
Skepdick wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 7:12 pm I care about the epistemic God. The idea not the ontology.
Why epistemic God is important if Ontological God is not?
Skepdick wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 7:12 pm
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:19 pm Of course, they are different in belief.
No, they aren't. They are different in vocabulary - they are practically indistinguishable in behaviour.
I am living in a Muslim country so I am afraid to say things in public that I am saying here. So belief changes behavior.
Skepdick wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 7:12 pm
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:19 pm I disagree. I follow my own way that I think is right.
How different is "your own way" from society's way?
They kill me if I tell the truth in public. I am however open to dialog. I might be wrong as I learned from the past that I was wrong.
Skepdick wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 7:12 pm
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 3:19 pm Metaphorically? What does stoning people to death mean metaphorically?
It means that they stoned people to death. Literally. Take your lesson from it. Draw a moral from the story and move on.
But I don't believe in such a thing as sin. So I don't think that it is correct to kill people brutally because of sin.
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6591
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: How did you change paradigm?

Post by Iwannaplato »

Skepdick wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 4:49 pm Now those kinds of beliefs are about how reality works/behaves. They aren't the kind of beliefs about "what exists".
Coolness, status, fundamental attractiveness, success (as defined), the elect...I think they have to do with what exists'.
They are the sort of thing where you attempt to anticipate outcomes based on your own behaviour.
Or on your and others' assessment of essences. And often give up in the face of not having the right essence. Yes, there are behavioral heuristics (as there are for the religious...I mean, the other kinds of religious.) Again, as there are for all kinds of believers in heuristics and essences.
But then once you develop a model for the sort of interactions you care about that's probably implicit knowledge that you simply can't make explicit.

Teaching intuitions is hard.
Noticing intuitions is hard.
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: How did you change paradigm?

Post by Skepdick »

Iwannaplato wrote: Wed Jan 25, 2023 6:44 am fundamental attractiveness, success (as defined), the elect...I think they have to do with what exists'.
No wonder I wasn't one of the cool kids. I was more concerned with what should exist that doesn't exist yet.

Building/inventing stuff.

Iwannaplato wrote: Wed Jan 25, 2023 6:44 am Noticing intuitions is hard.
Once you train it... it's peanuts.
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6591
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: How did you change paradigm?

Post by Iwannaplato »

Skepdick wrote: Wed Jan 25, 2023 7:16 am No wonder I wasn't one of the cool kids.
You may not have been interested in any of the cools, but there are many. [/quote]
I was more concerned with what should exist that doesn't exist yet.
I was concerned with survival and not being attacked. Those were two different overlapping concerns and had to do with both in and out of school. After that, any room left over, dealt with creative stuff, not that I clearly classified that for myself or the friends also involved.
Building/inventing stuff.
So, some overlap here.
Once you train it... it's peanuts.
Certainly a lot of it is. But I find new stuff more than a few times a week.
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: How did you change paradigm?

Post by Skepdick »

bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 8:15 pm Sure, it is through education that people learn how to properly live.
It depends on what you mean by "education".

If you are going to teach them facts about reality, history and other ontological matters - you are teaching them nothing about how to properly live.

You are teaching them what to think not how to think.
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 8:15 pm No, I am saying that hate exists and it is important. There is no reason to be ashamed when you hate.
I find it unproductive to hate. Anybody who can drive me to hate has control over me.

In fact, I can say with much honesty that I feel no hatred; or anger. I haven't felt it towards anything for a long time.

Different kind of emotions took its place. Better, more useful emotions.
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 8:15 pm Hate is Evil. We have to be fair when we want to hate as we have to be fair when we want to love.
When do you think hate is fair and appropriate?
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 8:15 pm They are important. See following.
Yeah - no. Let me make it more concrete. Whether you ontologically believe in gravity; or you ontologically believe in the curvature of spacetime - there's no difference.

It's just fundamental concepts. You'll still make the exact same predictions about life on Earth using Newton's fundamentals; or Einstein's fundamentals.

So ontology doesn't matter - the result matters.
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 8:15 pm Well, God is supreme, Omniscient for example, if exists. If God says to do X and not do Y based on His/Her Omniscience then I should better follow His/Hers command. There must be a good reason to do X and not do Y since He/She is Omniscient and I am not.
But are you following God's commands; or the commands of whoever wrote The Bible?

Why follow anybody's commands if you have your own moral intuition/compass?

If you are looking for a Moral authority - there's Common Law, Jurrisprudence and your own moral intuition.
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 8:15 pm God is Omniscient so He/she can teach people the proper way of living otherwise we have to learn things through trial and error.
How would God teach you anything? How is he going to communicate that knowledge to you?
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 8:15 pm
Skepdick wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 7:12 pm Ignore ontology - it doesn't matter if God exists or not.
It is important.
It really isn't.

You could believe God exists and be wrong.
You could believe God doesn't exist and be wrong.

You can do whatever you like with God.
You can do whatever you like without God.

It seems the idea has no ontological value.
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 8:15 pm What do you mean by manifesting God into existence?
Bringing more Goodness to the world. Improve things. Improve yourself. Improve other humans. Improve society.

Don't settle for the status quo.
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 8:15 pm The Greatest Evil also. It matters since we have to know whether we should follow the scriptures literally or not.
But the scriptures were written by people. Why follow other people's scriptures if you have your own moral intuition?

Why don't they follow your scriptures?
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 8:15 pm It is not a useless idea as I described in previous comments.
It's incredibly useless. You've given your moral intuition a name.

So now you get to say "God told me to do X" instead of "I decided to do X".
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 8:15 pm I care. I am not Omniscient so I follow the command of Omniscient.
But if you aren't Omniscient how do you know you are following the command of Omniscient?

You could be following the command of somebody who's taken you for a sucker.

If you are following any holy book - you are most definitely not following the command of anybody Omniscient.

You are following the command of humans commanding you.
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 8:15 pm Why epistemic God is important if Ontological God is not?
Because it makes you take responsibility for your moral choices.

God didn't tell you anything - you justified your choices with a holy book.
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 8:15 pm I am living in a Muslim country so I am afraid to say things in public that I am saying here. So belief changes behavior.
I hear you. Good people always get defeated by a bad system. But there's your choice.

God tells you apostacy is a death sentence. So listen... and adapt yourself to the system. Or leave.

Whatever choice you make... it wasn't God that told you to do it ;)
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 8:15 pm They kill me if I tell the truth in public.
Which truth? Is there no way to tell that truth in a way that doesn't get you killed?
bahman wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 8:15 pm But I don't believe in such a thing as sin. So I don't think that it is correct to kill people brutally because of sin.
Seee. You don't need God to tell you what to do.

It seems to me you understand the problem with fundamentalism (reading holy books literally) quite perfectly.

When you read everything as literal; when you think God is ontological - you submit to the authority and question no commandments. Cruelty ensues.
That's the problem and the conundrum.

If other people aren't open to reason and to pursuing a better way... I have nothing else to say to you but my most heartfelt compassion and sorrow. I can't imagine what it's like to live in such a mental prison.
Belinda
Posts: 8030
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: How did you change paradigm?

Post by Belinda »

Skepdick wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 5:54 pm
Belinda wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 5:50 pm I wonder if one's chosen theory of existence is chosen with the unconscious motive of rationalising intuitions learned in childhood and adulthood. For instance, how else could any post-enlightenment man chose to believe in substance dualism?
I think the whole vocabulary of "believe in" disappears as one explores a bunch of perspectives.

You spot the patterns between the opposing world-views and you abstract those into general principles. The usual thesis/antithesys/synthesis stuff. And then the cycle continues.

One could even use the philosophical positions for mere discursive purposes. Some times it's more useful to be a monist, sometimes it's more useful to be a dualist to drive the point home.

Don't think of your philosophical knowledge as anything other than a resource to be exploited for effective communication.
I'd go along with most of what you say except that I prefer in every discussion to nail my colors to the mast.
Post Reply