"Educated people are more likely to be atheists."

Paidion · Post by **Paidion** » Thu Jun 25, 2015 2:48 pm

It seems almost a law of human nature, that those who are most critical of others are the most sensitive to any criticism of themselves. Perhaps this is indicative of low self-esteem, and their own over-critical spirit is a form of self-defence.

steve · Post by **steve** » Sun Jun 28, 2015 11:27 am

For the sake maintaining the spiritual quality of this forum, I have taken the liberty of deleting some of the more recent posts. The deleted posts were not all offensive, by any means, but the conversation got seriously derailed. I cannot personally see any reason why dizerner should have become offended, since he was not abused—only corrected about the usage of a particular word. I agree with others that he misunderstood the criticism and reacted as if he was being attacked. In any case, my apologies to any whose posts were deleted. I received private complaints about the direction the thread was going, and I suggest that it return to the subject of the original post.

Jose · Post by **Jose** » Sun Jun 28, 2015 12:40 pm

I apologize to everyone for any part that I may have had in steering this conversation in an unfruitful direction.

TheEditor · Post by **TheEditor** » Sun Jun 28, 2015 3:18 pm

I too apologize for my occasionally intractable nature.

Regards, Brenden.

steve · Post by **steve** » Sun Jun 28, 2015 4:17 pm

I had no objection to your posts. For some reason, dizerner was not understanding your comments and unnecessariy found them offensive. At least that was my take.

dizerner · Post by **dizerner** » Sun Jun 28, 2015 6:51 pm

I'm sure you all know I can disagree and debate in love. But when I'm ganged up on and told I confused Solipsism with a Solipsist that's just ridiculously untrue and insulting. I then was told my explanation, that was clear, and anyone should be able to understand, was "digging my heels in" and that honestly is just stupid. I wish all the comments were left up, just so if any rational person passes by, they could immediately see why I was frustrated. However, I apologize for being oversensitive and my harsh comments, however justified I felt, since I acted outside of grace.

dizerner · Post by **dizerner** » Sun Jun 28, 2015 9:37 pm

Please note that Paidion was the first one to change -ISM to -IST not me.

Paidion wrote:Are the words in parenthes meant to define "solipsism"? If so, they don't. A solipsist is one who believes that only he exists.

If you all want to "jump on" someone for making that mistake, jump on him. He said I defined SOLIPSISM then defined a SOLIPSIST. So I answered within his own framework without a bizarre need to make sure someone knew the difference between -IST and -ISM. All three people that tried to "correct" me were, and still are, completely incorrect. Paidion was challenging my definition of SOLIPSISM not a SOLIPSIST, and that's what I defended, I defended my definition of Solpsism, no where did I make any mistake about the difference between -IST and -ISM but I rather changed Paidion's unwarranted change into -IST back into the framework of ISM. But either way, obviously a Solipsist will always believe Solipsism, so the entire point you are correcting me about is pointless even if you were right (but none of you were right, I never defined -IST as -ISM in any way). I feel stupid defending myself over something this basic, but I don't want anyone under the misapprehension that I somehow got "caught" in anything, because that's ridiculous.

TheEditor · Post by **TheEditor** » Sun Jun 28, 2015 11:59 pm

I can see how you could have taken it that way in the beginning. My frustration only came into play because it appeared to me as though you couldn't see I was making what I said and admitted was a "geeky" grammar distinction between "ism" and "ist" and continued to take exception to the correction. Out of respect for the anonymous that are wearisome of this, I'll respond no more.

Regards, Brenden.

Homer · Post by **Homer** » Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:24 am

Hey, how about let's all go read 1 Corinthians 13.

Dizerner, I hope you continue here.

steve · Post by **steve** » Mon Jun 29, 2015 10:16 am

How about no more discussion of -ism and -ist, and get back on topic?

The Narrow Path Ministries

"Educated people are more likely to be atheists."

Re: "Educated people are more likely to be atheists."

Re: "Educated people are more likely to be atheists."

Re: "Educated people are more likely to be atheists."

Re: "Educated people are more likely to be atheists."

Re: "Educated people are more likely to be atheists."

Re: "Educated people are more likely to be atheists."

Re: "Educated people are more likely to be atheists."

Re: "Educated people are more likely to be atheists."

Re: "Educated people are more likely to be atheists."

Re: "Educated people are more likely to be atheists."