`

You don't offend me in the slightest. I have simply been paying attention to your conversations, not just with me, but with others as well.

In fact, I have learned a lot from you even though I find it hard to understand what you are saying at times. Sometimes your statements are ambiguous.

I am very familiar with people actively questioning my beliefs. That does not bother me. I question my own beliefs.

We cannot doubt that that is a tree during language acquisition. In fact, whatever it is that we are learning the identity of at that time cannot be doubted because we are in the process of forming a belief system and pre-existing belief grounds all doubt. Language acquisition is the basis by which we form and hold complex belief about the world and/or ourselves.

I'm happy to hear that I've not offended you Jb. I had not thought that I had, despite what jrbogie asked. You and I have a history of conversation serving as a backdrop for this and future ones. While we do not always agree, I find that there are no feelings of ill-will.

of course not. i would never suggest what YOU find. it's me that finds that it constitutes a personal attack.

Wow. That is so amazingly wrong, its just mind boggling... but its clear you are fully committed to your belief system. May it serve whatever purpose it serves for you.

Well I don't even have a clue what he (Creative) means by that statement.

Again, massage, I'm more than willing to listen if you should care to give some reasoning for the unsupported opinions you are beginning to pattern. Care to back up the objection?

My belief system necessarily includes hearing another out. Is that it?

moreso hearing another out and then ridiculing whatever thinking differs from your own. you began this thread and, if i recall correctly, asked for other's thoughts on the topic of belief. from the get go you've been doing your best to tear down anybody's thoughts on belief who sees the topic from a different perspective than yours. fine with me. i find enjoyment and amusement in these forums much because of folks who begin threads such as this seemingly to encourage an exchange of viewpoints on topics of interest to them when all they really want is to have a platform for shouting yout their own view. i'll dive head first right in to such a thread just to see how far it'll go beating that same drum but if you've so little regard, much less respect, about how other people think, why ask for thoughts? just more fodder for ridicule?

Different people lose interest in dialogue with C. for different reasons. My reasons are different than most of the ones I've seen expressed by others in the past.

This is not true. I'm prone to assent to anothers view, but it requires meeting the same strict criterion that I hold my own to. That's nothing special, really. I mean, what I state passes through the same "tearing down" mechanisms. That is why it interests me to hear another out. I need not agree afterwards, even if I'd like to at times.

The accusation of ridiculing another is unfounded, I assure you.

I understand that process. That is why so many people get the impression that my mind is "made up" on what I believe.

I am willing to hear them out and consider new things, but rarely do they have anything new for me to consider. Been there, done that.

They have no concept of the "strict criterion" they are up against.

ah, so it's YOUR strict criteria that determines what is and is not redicule. i can assure you MY strict criteria differs greately. the accusation is definitely founded according to MY strict criteria. but i wasn't asking.

With all due respect Creative, this is a sample if how you "hear people out."

Let me explain some things to you jrbogie. Do with it what you may, but this is most likely the last time I'll reply to this sort of thing, although I can certainly envision some possible exceptions.

First, the last few responses of yours are clearly about me personally. Second, it is also quite clear that you believe that I'm ridiculing you and others on purpose. In other words, you believe that I've been doing what you are now doing. Perhaps the two are connected?

Now, here's another problem I see. It is one grounded upon behavioral expectation. If another makes statements which do not hold up to stringent critical thinking processes(logic/reason) while in the midst of objecting and/or debating to statements that I've made, then they ought expect criticism in return. I am actively practicing and engaging in critical/analytical philosophy, and this is a philosophy forum. When engaged in philosophical discourse, if another's statements logically lead to absurd, unintelligible, nonsensical, self-contradictory, and/or counterintuitive conclusions, I will point it out as clearly as I know how. That's one part of doing philosophy, and a crucial one for building and/or maintaining a coherent set of thoughts/beliefs about the world and/or ourselves. It is also crucial for not assenting to falsehood or likely falsehood.

Yet another problem here is one of interpretation of facts/events. I do not aim at ridicule. You've accused me of intentionally proposing questions/dialogue for the intent of ridiculing another. This is an allegation that you are not equipped to be able to make about me. There is no question that you believe that that is the case, afterall you've stated it clearly enough. Following your earlier statements, I'm inclined to think that you believe that you know this, because you've experienced it and equate experience and knowledge. Well, that notion is false. Knowledge cannot be false. It cannot be knowledge. It is therefore, false belief. Now, in order for you to accept that, you must first trust the source. Evidently, that could be a problem in this case. Nonetheless, it is a requirement for taking another at their word. I'm telling you jrbogie, I am not ridiculing you personally. I'm merely being very critical of what is being stated/claimed. There is a huge difference.

So here are the choices...

1. You accept the notion that you're mistaken about another's intent, based upon the testimony of the other.
2. You do not and continue to hold a false belief.

I cannot tell you what to do, nor would I. All I can say, is that your interpretation of what has transpired here in this thread and perhaps others is lacking in truth somewhere along the line. I am sorry you feel that way.

Jb, you've given a sample of responses after hearing one out... and very select ones at that. One cannot get a feel for what is going on by such a severely limited number of 'examples'. Not to mention the fact that those statements followed hearing another out, and cannot be correctly called a part of that.

It severely lacks in proper feedback. Especially the last one.
I can tell you are misunderstanding me, yet you don't think you are, and you don't ask any questions.

meh.

It really doesn't matter.
It's not as if we have to understand each other.

"Meh" was in response to the fact that I had lost patience. I offered a clear and valid point which denied your objection and further supported the statement which you were objecting to. You have yet to attend to that. Instead, at a time when some would recognize that the point was both valid and true(sound) and respond accordingly, you offhandedly dismissed it rather than continuing to engage.

My responses from there followed accordingly.