Plutarck
Unregistered
P
Franko said:
And then Franko, after such biting and intelligent remarks, proceeds to...
...talk too him for more than 3 whole paragraphs.
Anyone care to explain this one?
And then Franko, after such biting and intelligent remarks, proceeds to...
...talk too him for more than 3 whole paragraphs.
Anyone care to explain this one?
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
huh. My prediction is still holding true. I may have to re-think my position on precognition.Franko said:
Anyway, getting back on topic. Out of curiosity, does anyone know of a forum board or IRL group that would stand behind Franko's assertions? Obviously, Deist.org wasn't one of them, but might there be one? I guess what I'm asking is, are there any more Franko's out there?
Upchurch
Plutarck
Unregistered
P
Franko said:
Franko said:
Now I've apparently changed my name to Whodini, Upchurch, or Diogenes.
And the contradictions continue to mount...
Hi Franko
Perhaps you missed my earlier posting of this?
_______________
Franko I am very confused now (not a too uncommon state for me I'll freely admit). I have three major questions (with comments) from what you have stated.
The first:
You say "I" have no free will yet "my" actions can have consequences for "me".
How can this be? Since any action "I" do is not of my “”choice and in fact was already been pre-determined for me by your goddess.
Before I was born/created your logical goddess "decided" that I would do certain actions that would have consequences for me after I die, some of which will be horrible, yet I have no choice what my actions should be.
The second:
Since my consciousness has no free will and is constrained to do whatever your logical goddess has decided I must do then how can any of my actions be considered "wrong", "bad" or "immoral"? They are all the "will" of the logical goddess.
If tomorrow I went out and murdered someone and stole all their possession I can claim that I have no "free-will" and therefore cannot beheld responsible for my actions - my actions are just what the logical goddess decided they should be? Under your worldview the person I murdered is just as "responsible" for his death as I am i.e. not at all.
The third:
Why do you hold atheists responsible for their beliefs? It is the goddess decision and choice that atheists should believe as they do.
Perhaps you missed my earlier posting of this?
_______________
Franko I am very confused now (not a too uncommon state for me I'll freely admit). I have three major questions (with comments) from what you have stated.
The first:
You say "I" have no free will yet "my" actions can have consequences for "me".
How can this be? Since any action "I" do is not of my “”choice and in fact was already been pre-determined for me by your goddess.
Before I was born/created your logical goddess "decided" that I would do certain actions that would have consequences for me after I die, some of which will be horrible, yet I have no choice what my actions should be.
The second:
Since my consciousness has no free will and is constrained to do whatever your logical goddess has decided I must do then how can any of my actions be considered "wrong", "bad" or "immoral"? They are all the "will" of the logical goddess.
If tomorrow I went out and murdered someone and stole all their possession I can claim that I have no "free-will" and therefore cannot beheld responsible for my actions - my actions are just what the logical goddess decided they should be? Under your worldview the person I murdered is just as "responsible" for his death as I am i.e. not at all.
The third:
Why do you hold atheists responsible for their beliefs? It is the goddess decision and choice that atheists should believe as they do.
Ipecac
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2002
- Messages
- 1,846
Franko said:
You still haven't addressed my point about possible disincentives that exist within the six month time period. Like getting caught.
If your theory is "inescapable fact" then it should be easy to prove. Atheists should go nuts when they know they are going to die. Does this happen?
(Please note, behavioral theories are not fact. The credit card analogy is not valid because there is a huge difference between getting a free credit card and running up the debt on YOUR OWN credit card, death or no death.)
And I'm not going to bite. You have been very polite to me and I appreciate it as I am almost unfailingly polite on these boards. But to most posters you are as ill-mannered as anyone in here if not more so.
Darat,
Sorry, with the little Upchuck and Plutard running so scarred they tend to crap the threads up with their fluff, burying actual posts. Impotent gestures are all that is really available to them.
It was ONLY preordained by HER, if She created you. But She didn’t, She only created (generates) this universe. She didn't create You.
You have no choice, this is True. Some entities are inherently insane, but other entities are not. The Sane ones are trying to sort out and “capture” the other Sane entities from the rest (the insane). The insane entities get dumped, and after a long long time they fade into nonexistence. But a Sane entity can reach “escape velocity”, and travel through Time perpetually (Eternally).
If you were taking a test, the LG would be the person to copy an answer from. She is the sanest, and therefore the most benevolent entity perceived. It is true that this is her universe, and while you are here you obey her rules, but that does not change your intrinsic nature (whether you are good or evil). The LG being the “most good” (the goodest? … how about Omnibenevolent?) entity is also the most powerful (Omnipotent, which is the same as “sanest”).
Now when you say that something is “wrong”, or ‘bad”, or “immoral” what you are saying is that it is “wrong”, or ‘bad”, or “immoral” relative to the perception of the logical goddess. One might assume that this is arbitrary, and that this is so just because She happens to be the one in charge. If someone else was in charge, then their perceptions would decide “wrong”, or ‘bad”, or “immoral”. While that is true, the LG didn’t get to be LG by accident. Gravity, consciousness, even Time itself (all manifestations of the same thing really) all conspired to make her “God”. It was her Fate.
Now what she decided, just what she observed.
Not at all. Just because your intrinsic characteristics are intrinsic, doesn’t make you NOT responsible for them. You are who you are, like it or not. If you don’t like it … alter your Fate.
Atheists are intrinsically evil. They would destroy EVERYTHING if they could (yeah, I know what you’ll say [think], but it is true in a metaphysical sense). But the game has been rigged from the start. The A-Theists are going down, and I am one of the hitmen sent for the job. My Fate ... but I am perfectly content with it.
Sorry, with the little Upchuck and Plutard running so scarred they tend to crap the threads up with their fluff, burying actual posts. Impotent gestures are all that is really available to them.
It was ONLY preordained by HER, if She created you. But She didn’t, She only created (generates) this universe. She didn't create You.
You have no choice, this is True. Some entities are inherently insane, but other entities are not. The Sane ones are trying to sort out and “capture” the other Sane entities from the rest (the insane). The insane entities get dumped, and after a long long time they fade into nonexistence. But a Sane entity can reach “escape velocity”, and travel through Time perpetually (Eternally).
If you were taking a test, the LG would be the person to copy an answer from. She is the sanest, and therefore the most benevolent entity perceived. It is true that this is her universe, and while you are here you obey her rules, but that does not change your intrinsic nature (whether you are good or evil). The LG being the “most good” (the goodest? … how about Omnibenevolent?) entity is also the most powerful (Omnipotent, which is the same as “sanest”).
Now when you say that something is “wrong”, or ‘bad”, or “immoral” what you are saying is that it is “wrong”, or ‘bad”, or “immoral” relative to the perception of the logical goddess. One might assume that this is arbitrary, and that this is so just because She happens to be the one in charge. If someone else was in charge, then their perceptions would decide “wrong”, or ‘bad”, or “immoral”. While that is true, the LG didn’t get to be LG by accident. Gravity, consciousness, even Time itself (all manifestations of the same thing really) all conspired to make her “God”. It was her Fate.
Now what she decided, just what she observed.
Not at all. Just because your intrinsic characteristics are intrinsic, doesn’t make you NOT responsible for them. You are who you are, like it or not. If you don’t like it … alter your Fate.
Atheists are intrinsically evil. They would destroy EVERYTHING if they could (yeah, I know what you’ll say [think], but it is true in a metaphysical sense). But the game has been rigged from the start. The A-Theists are going down, and I am one of the hitmen sent for the job. My Fate ... but I am perfectly content with it.
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
so, if one does not have control over one's decision (free will), is it just for them to be punished for those decisions?
Upchurch
Upchurch
Ipecac,
I’ve responded in every one of my posts on this subject. You are trying to skirt the issue, because I specifically said A Person who believes that there are no ultimate consequences for their actions. Getting “caught” is a consequence, but tell me Ipecac, what are you claiming the odds of getting caught for a crime are AFTER YOU HAVE CEASED TO EXIST?
To a Theist, they will NEVER CEASE TO EXIST. Do you see the difference? Is this that difficult for your A-Theist mind to comprehend?
Well, there are a few problems here, but let me address just one. You seem to be assuming that no Atheist is actually an Agnostic or Deist at heart, but just can’t call themselves that for whatever reason. it is very similar to a Christian who is really an Agnostic or Atheist, yet, for whatever reason, cannot bring himself to stop labeling himself as a Christian.
I disagree. Obviously you don’t like the analogy because it makes my point, and demonstrates exactly and simply why devout Theists are more likely to be moral then devout Atheists.
You are not a very objective observer. Between Upchurch, Whodini, Plutard, Tricky, and Diogenes alone they have posted 50 insults for every one I have posted. Plus they do not actually respond to any points, or raise any of their own. All they do is post ad hominem. After a while it gets old, but it does demonstrate their religious fanaticism. I remember you also telling me that they weren’t following everyone of my posts with the 5 minute fluff either? Are you STILL standing by that claim? Hehehe ….
I’ve responded in every one of my posts on this subject. You are trying to skirt the issue, because I specifically said A Person who believes that there are no ultimate consequences for their actions. Getting “caught” is a consequence, but tell me Ipecac, what are you claiming the odds of getting caught for a crime are AFTER YOU HAVE CEASED TO EXIST?
To a Theist, they will NEVER CEASE TO EXIST. Do you see the difference? Is this that difficult for your A-Theist mind to comprehend?
Well, there are a few problems here, but let me address just one. You seem to be assuming that no Atheist is actually an Agnostic or Deist at heart, but just can’t call themselves that for whatever reason. it is very similar to a Christian who is really an Agnostic or Atheist, yet, for whatever reason, cannot bring himself to stop labeling himself as a Christian.
I disagree. Obviously you don’t like the analogy because it makes my point, and demonstrates exactly and simply why devout Theists are more likely to be moral then devout Atheists.
You are not a very objective observer. Between Upchurch, Whodini, Plutard, Tricky, and Diogenes alone they have posted 50 insults for every one I have posted. Plus they do not actually respond to any points, or raise any of their own. All they do is post ad hominem. After a while it gets old, but it does demonstrate their religious fanaticism. I remember you also telling me that they weren’t following everyone of my posts with the 5 minute fluff either? Are you STILL standing by that claim? Hehehe ….
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
so, no answer?
Don't want to answer or can't answer? It's a valid question with no "fluff" to it.
Upchurch
Don't want to answer or can't answer? It's a valid question with no "fluff" to it.
Upchurch
Plutarck
Unregistered
P
Franko said:
predetermine: To determine the future of. v.predestine, destine, fate, foreordain, ordain, predetermine, preordain
preordain: To determine the future of. v.
predestine, destine, fate, foreordain, ordain, predetermine, preordain.
---------------------------------------------------------
Excerpted from American Heritage Talking Dictionary
Copyright © 1997 The Learning Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Two words which are synonyms of one another, yet Franko says "It was ONLY preordained by HER..." as though they meant something different.
And the abuse of the english language continues...
So let's see here:
Sanest or Most Sane = Omnipotent
Sanest or Most Sane = Omnibenevolent
Looking at these two sentances of Franko's:
In the first, power decides goodness ("Might Makes Right"). In the second, goodness decides power ("Right Makes Might"). I shall leave the judging of the the logical coherancy of this as an excercise for the reader.
Now, one might wonder why - rather than "Sane" and "Insane" - Franko does not simply use the standard english words "Powerful" and "Weak". We have already demonstrated clearly, according to Franko's own statements, that the words have the same meanings.
And the butchering of the english language Continues...
Quite literally then, "Might makes right".
Here we clearly see that She did not "decide" what would happen, only that she observed it. But of course earlier Franko said:
Reconciling these views I shall leave as an excercise for the reader, with the reminder about the definition of preordain:
preordain: v tr
To appoint, decree, or ordain in advance; foreordain.
From the thesaurus:
preordain
To determine the future of. v.
predestine, destine, fate, foreordain, ordain, predetermine, preordain.
Yet earlier Franko said:
So what we may conclude is that you have no free will, unless you change your Fate, at which point you presumably either gain free will or somehow excercise something seemingly very much like free will in the Fate altering process.
The discovery of how one is able to alter one's Fate when you have no free will is left as an excercise for the reader.
And now we have this mystery quote. Can you guess who said it?
Hint: It's a trick question.
If Franko is the best hitman She sent to take down the A-Theists, then all A-Theists can certainly sleep comfortably at night.
Plutarck
Unregistered
P
Franko said:
So Ipecac isn't a very objective observer, but of course Franko somehow is. One can safely assume that eventually we will discover that Franko's definition of "objective" in no way correlates with any english definition of "objective".
But before one quickly goes on to another post, let us first bask in the radiance of clear hypocrisy as Franko complains about other people insulting him and other people not responding to any points or bringing up any of their own.
Yes, you did read that right. I shall leave the reader to attempt to fully grasp one of the most truly hypocritical things ever said.
Tricky
Briefly immortal
Damn, Plutarch, all this excercise is gonna kill old readers like me. How about if you just leave it as a "puzzle" for the reader. 
So Plutard ... I didn't waste the time reading your rant ...
but I did sense that you might have buried a question in there "some where" ...?
So if you got a question ... ask it ... I told up you fanatics I am not going to pretend along with your delusions, and I'm done wasting time with your nonsense.
but I did sense that you might have buried a question in there "some where" ...?
So if you got a question ... ask it ... I told up you fanatics I am not going to pretend along with your delusions, and I'm done wasting time with your nonsense.
Tricky
Briefly immortal
Translation guide:Franko said:
When Franko says "I'm done wasting time with your nonsense" it means "You have posted questions I cannot answer".
Congratulations, Plutarck. You have been put on Frankos "waste of time" list. I am proud to say I have been on it a few times myself. The other greatest compliment Franko can pay you is to make an obscene pun on you name. I think I am up to about twenty of those (I defy anyone to do better).
However, do not fear that Franko really will ignore you in the future. Franko and The Truth are not even casual acquaintances.
------
Hey Franko, my little man-child. How about a direct answer to this question.
Which of these statements is inconsistant with Logical Deism?
1) You have no choice.
2) If you make the wrong choice you will suffer.
Plutarck
Unregistered
P
Franko said:
Prediction:
Franko will continue to waste time with "our nonsense", regardless of any threats (I like to think of them as promises) to the contrary.
But hey, I could use a good laugh. Here are some "shouldn't be hard to answer" questions for you:
1) How does someone with no free will alter their fate? If someone can alter their fate, in what way do they not have free will?
2) In Frankonese, are the words "preordain" and "predestine" synonyms like they are in English, or do they mean different things? If they do mean different things, what is the Frankonesian definition of each?
3) Regarding this statement of yours:
And what creates "You" (Ipecac, in this instance)?
4) Regarding this statement of yours:
Is this not, in fact, "Might makes right" in that right and wrong, good and bad, are based solely upon the dictates of whatever entity happens to be the most powerful entity at any given time?
5) Regarding this exchange:
If She preordains/predestines the universe, and the universe decided the actions of Ipecac in the above situation, how did She not decide the actions of Ipecac above?
In simplified syllogistic form:
She controls the universe
The universe controls Ipecac
She controls Ipecac
How is this not so?
6) Given these:
Franko said:
Franko said:
In what way were you not lying about what your prediction was?
Guest
Unregistered
G
Hey Franko,
You have my invitation to come to Paltalk, in the Social Issues room, and find your way to the atheist chat room.
It will probably be titled something like "Is God Real or a Fantasy?", etc.. Something to that tune.
Make sure to bring up your Logical Deism ideas there. There are a number of intelligent people there who enjoy debates and learning new things.
I look forward to seeing you there. My nick will either be "Daoist" or "Atheist".
As you know, a chat in real-time voice is quite a bit different than in a forum ...
You have my invitation to come to Paltalk, in the Social Issues room, and find your way to the atheist chat room.
It will probably be titled something like "Is God Real or a Fantasy?", etc.. Something to that tune.
Make sure to bring up your Logical Deism ideas there. There are a number of intelligent people there who enjoy debates and learning new things.
I look forward to seeing you there. My nick will either be "Daoist" or "Atheist".
As you know, a chat in real-time voice is quite a bit different than in a forum ...