Wazua
»
Club SK
»
Culture
»
Dawkins' delusion
Rank: Member Joined: 6/4/2015 Posts: 604
|
Muriel wrote:¿ wrote:Muriel wrote:¿ wrote:Muriel wrote:
Swenani, brother, since Tuesday I have been waiting for your follow up question in vain.
I had anticipated you would ask me what the other concept is.
I would have answered not necessarily 'christianity' as is commonly taken by the man on the street, but 'the great controversy in which there is no hope for redemption for and by oneself'.
Does the self condemn or accept condemnation? It is capable. If the self can condemn itself,it is possible it can redeem itself and if it accepts external condemnation then it can just as easily reject or ignore this foreign concept. Either way, there is hope. It is a long leap, from self condemnation to self redemption. How sure are you of its landing? It could be capable of just self condemnation, nothing more. Meanwhile, it is true that it can accept or ignore an external condemnation - and move on. What is the purpose of hope if you are sure?
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 11/19/2009 Posts: 3,142
|
¿ wrote:Muriel wrote:¿ wrote:Muriel wrote:¿ wrote:Muriel wrote:
Swenani, brother, since Tuesday I have been waiting for your follow up question in vain.
I had anticipated you would ask me what the other concept is.
I would have answered not necessarily 'christianity' as is commonly taken by the man on the street, but 'the great controversy in which there is no hope for redemption for and by oneself'.
Does the self condemn or accept condemnation? It is capable. If the self can condemn itself,it is possible it can redeem itself and if it accepts external condemnation then it can just as easily reject or ignore this foreign concept. Either way, there is hope. It is a long leap, from self condemnation to self redemption. How sure are you of its landing? It could be capable of just self condemnation, nothing more. Meanwhile, it is true that it can accept or ignore an external condemnation - and move on. What is the purpose of hope if you are sure? Hope implies something positive. Obviously, then, hope excludes condemnation. Hope is for redemption hence hope increases with surety of condemnation. There is harmony in hoping when sure.
|
|
|
Rank: User Joined: 8/15/2013 Posts: 13,237 Location: Vacuum
|
Muriel wrote:¿ wrote:Muriel wrote:¿ wrote:Muriel wrote:¿ wrote:Muriel wrote:
Swenani, brother, since Tuesday I have been waiting for your follow up question in vain.
I had anticipated you would ask me what the other concept is.
I would have answered not necessarily 'christianity' as is commonly taken by the man on the street, but 'the great controversy in which there is no hope for redemption for and by oneself'.
Does the self condemn or accept condemnation? It is capable. If the self can condemn itself,it is possible it can redeem itself and if it accepts external condemnation then it can just as easily reject or ignore this foreign concept. Either way, there is hope. It is a long leap, from self condemnation to self redemption. How sure are you of its landing? It could be capable of just self condemnation, nothing more. Meanwhile, it is true that it can accept or ignore an external condemnation - and move on. What is the purpose of hope if you are sure? Hope implies something positive. Obviously, then, hope excludes condemnation. Hope is for redemption hence hope increases with surety of condemnation. There is harmony in hoping when sure. Hope doesn't imply something positive but implies negativity and desperation. When you are sure you do not hope but when you are unsure or uncertain, you hope If Obiero did it, Who Am I?
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 11/19/2009 Posts: 3,142
|
Swenani wrote:Muriel wrote:¿ wrote:Muriel wrote:¿ wrote:Muriel wrote:¿ wrote:Muriel wrote:
Swenani, brother, since Tuesday I have been waiting for your follow up question in vain.
I had anticipated you would ask me what the other concept is.
I would have answered not necessarily 'christianity' as is commonly taken by the man on the street, but 'the great controversy in which there is no hope for redemption for and by oneself'.
Does the self condemn or accept condemnation? It is capable. If the self can condemn itself,it is possible it can redeem itself and if it accepts external condemnation then it can just as easily reject or ignore this foreign concept. Either way, there is hope. It is a long leap, from self condemnation to self redemption. How sure are you of its landing? It could be capable of just self condemnation, nothing more. Meanwhile, it is true that it can accept or ignore an external condemnation - and move on. What is the purpose of hope if you are sure? Hope implies something positive. Obviously, then, hope excludes condemnation. Hope is for redemption hence hope increases with surety of condemnation. There is harmony in hoping when sure. Hope doesn't imply something positive but implies negativity and desperation. When you are sure you do not hope but when you are unsure or uncertain, you hope Dread has expectation just as hope also has. However they are not the same.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
Swenani wrote:tycho wrote:Swenani wrote:tycho wrote:The other day I visited a friend and found 'The God delusion' in one of his shelves. I sat down and read it and at the end of the day, I wondered why some people rated the book so highly.Now am seeing this comment from one of Dawkins' friends: “His treatment of philosophical ideas in The God Delusion is frequently funny and certainly good journalism,” Ruse said, “but to put it politely it is deeply uninformed.” This article has given me a glimpse of Dawkins' life, and I wonder if this issue of atheism/theism isn't just a game people play to structure their time meaningfully while chest thumping. http://www.theguardian.c...stroying-his-reputation
tycho wrote:I use wazua to allay my fears. And in my estimation my fears are a result of expectation and experience being at odds. It becomes easy for me to use this forum to deny, question, even ridicule another's experience and expectation just to affirm my secret wishes.
Wazua is used as a conning implement when it's a propaganda 'machine'. I like your thinking on this. I had similar thoughts while starting the thread. But there's a puzzle I'm trying to resolve: Let me call it the puzzle of optimal relation. That is, if one can stop conning him/herself, how can she/he relate with others who are probably conning themselves? Or to put it in another way, what's there to say? That is an impossible relation, If you have to stop conning yourself then you can't relate with those conning themselves, if you do, then you are conning yourself What's puzzling me now is how you came up with this conclusion swenani.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
majimaji wrote:
tychos delusion
You can be assured that tycho has lots of delusions. In fact, now that he can identify some of these delusions, the question becomes, so what do Dawkins' delusions imply?
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
Swenani wrote:Muriel wrote:¿ wrote:Muriel wrote:¿ wrote:Muriel wrote:¿ wrote:Muriel wrote:
Swenani, brother, since Tuesday I have been waiting for your follow up question in vain.
I had anticipated you would ask me what the other concept is.
I would have answered not necessarily 'christianity' as is commonly taken by the man on the street, but 'the great controversy in which there is no hope for redemption for and by oneself'.
Does the self condemn or accept condemnation? It is capable. If the self can condemn itself,it is possible it can redeem itself and if it accepts external condemnation then it can just as easily reject or ignore this foreign concept. Either way, there is hope. It is a long leap, from self condemnation to self redemption. How sure are you of its landing? It could be capable of just self condemnation, nothing more. Meanwhile, it is true that it can accept or ignore an external condemnation - and move on. What is the purpose of hope if you are sure? Hope implies something positive. Obviously, then, hope excludes condemnation. Hope is for redemption hence hope increases with surety of condemnation. There is harmony in hoping when sure. Hope doesn't imply something positive but implies negativity and desperation. When you are sure you do not hope but when you are unsure or uncertain, you hope Everything is a matter of probability; therefore hope has both positive and negative implications.
|
|
|
Wazua
»
Club SK
»
Culture
»
Dawkins' delusion
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.
|