A revolution in thought - Page 304

thedoc · #**7576** 06-30-2011, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kael

The point is that, in fact, we can have both, at least in theory. Hell, you even go on to say that we DO have both, and that your dad is the one who reconciled them. Whether we actually do or not is far from the resolved discussion you seem to think it is.

As you say 'free will' and 'determinism' is far from settled in the real world, but since Lessans has devised his own definitions of many relevant terms, it almost anything goes in his world.

peacegirl · #**7577** 06-30-2011, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thedoc

Oh well, Can't find it, I need to mark down where I read things, so I retract, except on the bottom of page 199 in the PDF he talks about entering the new world "of our own volition". But I did not say 'genocide' but you can read elimination however you want to. Another two sided equation, I write something and you read something, not always the same something.

No doc. Elimination means one thing only, and you know it. It was wrong to copy someone's false review. You didn't find this in the book, so admit it when you made a mistake.

specious_reasons · #**7578** 06-30-2011, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thedoc

Eliminated was ment as removed from participation in the society, much like native Americans were removed to reservations and restricted from participating in the society of the day.

I would say using the term "eliminate" would imply genocide, but I agree with what you said there. How about "segregation" instead? Lessans definitely envisions segregation between the New World and the people who have not yet accepted it.

peacegirl · #**7579** 06-30-2011, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Quote:

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Quote:

Originally Posted by LadyShea

And how does the no-God stand with man so man doesn't have to stand alone?

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I'm not sure what you mean.

Lessans quote you provided: This discovery also reveals that God is a mathematical, undeniable reality. This means, to put it another way, that Man Does Not Stand Alone.

I don't know what you read LadyShea, but it was in response to two different positions on the existence of God.

Since the
modern world of science was playing havoc with religion it needed a
boost and along came, just in the nick of time, a scientist who gave
seven reasons why he believed in God. A. Cressy Morrison, who wrote
his book, “Man Does Not Stand Alone,” was almost convinced that
God was a reality. He challenged Julian Huxley’s conclusions written
in his book, “Man Stands Alone.”

Both tried to answer the question,
“Is there a Supreme Intelligence guiding this universe?” Who is
right? Huxley said ‘no there isn’t,’ but Morrison’s arguments were
mathematically sound and he gave quite a boost to instilling faith
again in those people who were really beginning to wonder. I can
almost remember word for word how he tried to prove that nothing
happens by chance, and he did prove it except for this element of evil.

I read your post where you bolded the part about God being an undenialble reality and that because of it Man Does Not Stand Alone.

So, if God = Nature's laws, who exactly is standing with man?

Nature's laws.

peacegirl · #**7580** 06-30-2011, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doctor X

In the morass he does claim that those who do not choose to follow "the Way" will be legally compelled to do so. He does not claim they will be "eliminated."

Either way it is arguing what color cloud upon which Cloud Cuckoo-Land resides.

--J.D.

Where does he say that Doctor X? All these liars are coming out of the woodwork at once.

peacegirl · #**7581** 06-30-2011, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thedoc

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doctor X

In the morass he does claim that those who do not choose to follow "the Way" will be legally compelled to do so. He does not claim they will be "eliminated."

Either way it is arguing what color cloud upon which Cloud Cuckoo-Land resides.

--J.D.

Eliminated was ment as removed from participation in the society, much like native Americans were removed to reservations and restricted from participating in the society of the day.

HE NEVER SAID THAT DOC!!!!!! HE NEVER SAID PEOPLE WOULD BE REMOVED FROM SOCIETY OR RESTRICTED IN ANY WAY. ARE YOU CRAZY? :whup:

peacegirl · #**7582** 06-30-2011, 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by specious_reasons

Quote:

Originally Posted by thedoc

Eliminated was ment as removed from participation in the society, much like native Americans were removed to reservations and restricted from participating in the society of the day.

I would say using the term "eliminate" would imply genocide, but I agree with what you said there. How about "segregation" instead? Lessans definitely envisions segregation between the New World and the people who have not yet accepted it.

Absolutely not specious_reasons. Nothing like that AT ALL!!!! The misrepresentation of this work continues on... :fuming:

Vivisectus · #**7583** 06-30-2011, 01:39 PM

At least they represented the efferent camera correctly.

peacegirl · #**7584** 06-30-2011, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thedoc

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kael

The point is that, in fact, we can have both, at least in theory. Hell, you even go on to say that we DO have both, and that your dad is the one who reconciled them. Whether we actually do or not is far from the resolved discussion you seem to think it is.

As you say 'free will' and 'determinism' is far from settled in the real world, but since Lessans has devised his own definitions of many relevant terms, it almost anything goes in his world.

Fooey on you doc. Nothing you say is relevant.

Henry Quirk · #**7585** 06-30-2011, 03:14 PM

“What's the incentive? The possibility that this is a genuine discovery that can accomplish what it claims it can.”

Insufficient bait. As I say, '…since MY life seems to be moving along nicely without the 'wisdom' of Lessans and Rafael to buoy me: I can only assume that what they (you) have to offer is not worth the effort.'

thedoc · #**7586** 06-30-2011, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by specious_reasons

Quote:

Originally Posted by thedoc

Eliminated was ment as removed from participation in the society, much like native Americans were removed to reservations and restricted from participating in the society of the day.

I would say using the term "eliminate" would imply genocide, but I agree with what you said there. How about "segregation" instead? Lessans definitely envisions segregation between the New World and the people who have not yet accepted it.

You are correct, many words have different connotations depending on who is hearing it. I once used the phrase 'Killing isn't always a bad thing' and another person imediately took it as murder and got very upset about it, but I was including the killing involved in eating a meal and even a vegetarian kills some of the things they eat.

LadyShea · #**7587** 06-30-2011, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Quote:

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Quote:

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Quote:

Originally Posted by LadyShea

And how does the no-God stand with man so man doesn't have to stand alone?

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I'm not sure what you mean.

Lessans quote you provided: This discovery also reveals that God is a mathematical, undeniable reality. This means, to put it another way, that Man Does Not Stand Alone.

I don't know what you read LadyShea, but it was in response to two different positions on the existence of God.

Since the
modern world of science was playing havoc with religion it needed a
boost and along came, just in the nick of time, a scientist who gave
seven reasons why he believed in God. A. Cressy Morrison, who wrote
his book, “Man Does Not Stand Alone,” was almost convinced that
God was a reality. He challenged Julian Huxley’s conclusions written
in his book, “Man Stands Alone.”

Both tried to answer the question,
“Is there a Supreme Intelligence guiding this universe?” Who is
right? Huxley said ‘no there isn’t,’ but Morrison’s arguments were
mathematically sound and he gave quite a boost to instilling faith
again in those people who were really beginning to wonder. I can
almost remember word for word how he tried to prove that nothing
happens by chance, and he did prove it except for this element of evil.

I read your post where you bolded the part about God being an undenialble reality and that because of it Man Does Not Stand Alone.

So, if God = Nature's laws, who exactly is standing with man?

Nature's laws.

That's really stretching the metaphor.

thedoc · #**7588** 06-30-2011, 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by specious_reasons

Quote:

Originally Posted by thedoc

Eliminated was ment as removed from participation in the society, much like native Americans were removed to reservations and restricted from participating in the society of the day.

I would say using the term "eliminate" would imply genocide, but I agree with what you said there. How about "segregation" instead? Lessans definitely envisions segregation between the New World and the people who have not yet accepted it.

He also said that people would join the new society 'of their own free will', which would imply that if someone didn't want to be a part of it they could 'Opt. out', but that does leave the problem of 'where do they live'.

Vivisectus · #**7589** 06-30-2011, 03:30 PM

Also it doesn't add up. The Laws of Nature are distinctly anthropomorphic in this book - there is a design especially for human beings in a cosmos that is bigger than any of us can possibly imagine. That is basically stating that there IS a personal god - if there wasn't, there would not be a system there to make sure that just our lives are more pleasant, as the book seems to suggest.

thedoc · #**7590** 06-30-2011, 03:35 PM

There is another problem, Lessans says that people will take an examination to prove that they understand the rules and conditions of the new society to be a part of it. What happens if someone takes the exam, answers all the questions correctly but doesn't actually believe the principles. They could then take advantage of the system without fear of reprisal, they could have all the benefits with none of the responsability. I think I know a few people who could do that.

thedoc · #**7591** 06-30-2011, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LadyShea

That's really stretching the metaphor.

I think Lessans is stretching a lot of things, to the breaking point.

Kael · #**7592** 06-30-2011, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

We can't have both free will and determinism. That's an illusion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kael

The point is that, in fact, we can have both, at least in theory. Hell, you even go on to say that we DO have both, and that your dad is the one who reconciled them. Whether we actually do or not is far from the resolved discussion you seem to think it is.

I wanted to add here that I never went on to say that we DO have both Kael. Please don't misconstrue my words.

Perhaps you have an alternate interpretation for this sentence?

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

What he does is reconciles free will with determinism so that although will is not free, we are still able to make choices.

thedoc · #**7593** 06-30-2011, 04:07 PM

Has anyone else noticed that the closer we get to the truth, the more hysterical Peacegirl gets. Just as she uses complete agreement as an indicator of reading and understanding the book, perhaps we could use her incoherent ravings as an indicator of the correctness of our posts?

specious_reasons · #**7594** 06-30-2011, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Quote:

Originally Posted by specious_reasons

Quote:

Originally Posted by thedoc

Eliminated was ment as removed from participation in the society, much like native Americans were removed to reservations and restricted from participating in the society of the day.

I would say using the term "eliminate" would imply genocide, but I agree with what you said there. How about "segregation" instead? Lessans definitely envisions segregation between the New World and the people who have not yet accepted it.

Absolutely not specious_reasons. Nothing like that AT ALL!!!! The misrepresentation of this work continues on... :fuming:

page 175:

Quote:

When this
test has been passed and the person signs a statement that he will
never again blame another citizen for anything, he himself becomes
a citizen by receiving an identification number which is placed on a
card to be worn on the outside and on tags for his car that tell the
authorities he has taken the examination. The purpose of this
identification is to separate citizens from non-citizens during the
transition period.

(emphasis mine)

page 177:

Quote:

Assuming that you fully understand what it means that man’s will is
not free, the next step in our blueprint (our diagram of how it is now
possible to remove all evil from our lives) is to remove from around
the entire earth, regardless of who gets displaced, all those people who
are in any way associated with blame including the leaders and their
subordinates (remember, everything is exactly the same except for the
written test and the IBM offices); politicians, governors, senators, all
the way up to the President and his Cabinet. Everybody
notwithstanding gets displaced if their manner of earning a living is
the least bit redolent of blame.

(emphasis mine)
Honestly, I can't figure out what he means here. There's clearly segregation, but how does he expect to "remove" people when he can't use force? It's not clear. He might just mean that the new citizen leaders will just eliminate their jobs. At some later point, he says (page 180):

Quote:

In spite of the fact that many people will not be happy about
losing their profession, they will be forced to look for something else
because their services will no longer be needed. Soon to be displaced
are judges, juries, lawyers, the entire penal system, crime investigators,
intelligence agencies, liability insurance, every kind of license granting
permission to do something, all printed forms to check on your
honesty, credit cards (all but the IBM), travelers checks, money
orders, the banks as a place to safeguard money, and all tax adjusters.
The unions will be displaced not only because they blame employers
for not paying enough wages, but also because they try to prevent
abuses to employees using force.

Vivisectus · #**7595** 06-30-2011, 04:21 PM

Ah so in Lessans world, the Goyim wear the stars in stead of the jews!

I think they are being moved out of office, rather than put in camps. Although a point can be made that it would be better all round if we put all lawyers in camps.

Hey that means we get Chuck coming AND going!

LadyShea · #**7596** 06-30-2011, 04:23 PM

Okay peacegirl, you need to explain the quotes form the book in the above post .

How did specious misrepresent Lessans?

peacegirl · #**7597** 06-30-2011, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Henry Quirk

“What's the incentive? The possibility that this is a genuine discovery that can accomplish what it claims it can.”

Insufficient bait. As I say, '…since MY life seems to be moving along nicely without the 'wisdom' of Lessans and Rafael to buoy me: I can only assume that what they (you) have to offer is not worth the effort.'

Henry Henry Henry, where did you go? I thought left me

and you were the last vestige of possibility here. Please stay, otherwise this thread has been all used up. Maybe you will have something challenging, or enlightening to add to the conversation. At the very least, we'll have a chance. :yup:

peacegirl · #**7598** 06-30-2011, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thedoc

Has anyone else noticed that the closer we get to the truth, the more hysterical Peacegirl gets. Just as she uses complete agreement as an indicator of reading and understanding the book, perhaps we could use her incoherent ravings as an indicator of the correctness of our posts?

Doc dear, what led me to my hysteria is you precious One. You are ruining it for me and for Lessans due to your never ending ignorance. You are so incoherent that anyone with any aptitude at all would look at you like a total jerk. But lo and behold, the group stands together come near or come far. Dammm the people in here who think they are the gatekeepers of truth. Whether or not you see this truth, this is a tribute to Lessans who will one day be honored with stripes. :fuming:

ChuckF · #**7599** 06-30-2011, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

You are so incoherent that anyone with any aptitude would look at you like a total jerk. But lo and behold, the group stands together come near or come far.

no

peacegirl · #**7600** 06-30-2011, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChuckF

Quote:

Originally Posted by peacegirl

You are so incoherent that anyone with any aptitude would look at you like a total jerk. But lo and behold, the group stands together come near or come far.

no

I hope not Chuck, but it appears that way. I'm really sad about this.