×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

It's as though there was a discussion about math

smitty_one_each (243267) writes | about 10 months ago

User Journal 49

Me: "2 + 2 = 4"
Him: "You're incapable of seeing beyond your affirmations."
Me: "What, then? Can you sketch an alternative to traditional math?"
Him: "Look, you're just regurgitating the same old stuff. If you won't give that up, there's nothing I can do."
Me: "Sorry! I thought this was an exchange of ideas, not a con job."Me: "2 + 2 = 4"
Him: "You're incapable of seeing beyond your affirmations."
Me: "What, then? Can you sketch an alternative to traditional math?"
Him: "Look, you're just regurgitating the same old stuff. If you won't give that up, there's nothing I can do."
Me: "Sorry! I thought this was an exchange of ideas, not a con job."

--
Wow. I thought I was supposed to be the one who's nuts for thinking that Jesus of Nazareth is the Christ.
But you won't begin to catch me evangelizing the meaning of life in the kind of anti-intellectual mode I have conveyed above.
And, no, the above dialog is not a literal one. I've taken what I consider the gist of another discussion with someone else here on /. and recast it from scratch.

49 comments

:-) Nice one (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 10 months ago | (#43972613)

You: God sayez "2 + 2 = 4"

Me: What does 'god' have to do with anything? Don't be cluttering up biology with your 'cosmik debris'. I don't care about your 'alternatives', and your other rationalizations. I'm only telling you that your actions prove without any doubt your animal nature still prevails, and that only by arrogance do you place yourself above it all, and try to distance yourself from what you are. And of course you need to create a supreme being to protect and justify your supreme authority. You merely 'counter' animalism with more animalism. Got news for ya there. You have no 'moral' high ground. You are merely the same. These are the things you won't see. The 'alternative', should you decide to see it, is to stop, and inspect yourself before making your next move, this, as opposed to simply reacting, as you do now.

Jesus of Nazareth is the Christ? Then so is everybody else. That includes you and me. In fact so is everything else. All of your god's creations are divine. It couldn't be any other way.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 10 months ago | (#43975065)

Not that you'd accept any secular data [cdc.gov] either, if it went against your convictions.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 10 months ago | (#44003381)

What, it just means people should be more careful when they have sex. No real controversy there.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 10 months ago | (#44007025)

But telling people to be more *serious* about having sex, gets in the way of their atheistic Right to the Holy Orgasm, which they should be allowed to experience without your naysaying.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 10 months ago | (#44007437)

It's not an order, it's a suggestion.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 10 months ago | (#44009533)

In my experience, any suggestion against the Holy Orgasm to liberals is met by a lynch mob.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 10 months ago | (#44011719)

That's another issue, and those kind of people are not liberals, not in the classic sense anyway.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about 10 months ago | (#44034497)

"those kind of people are not liberals, not in the classic sense anyway"

Should we just give up on these left/right, liberal/conservative labels and just go with Rousseauan and Lockean?
BHO is going to defend the Orwellian state, and liberals are going to rush to call him 'conservative' for it.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 10 months ago | (#44034629)

Should we just give up on these left/right, liberal/conservative labels...

Yes, of course.

...and just go with Rousseauan and Lockean?

No, in the physical world strong and weak will suffice. We can drop the 'philosophical' charade.

You all can call Obama what you like. I just see him as a paid actor, reading his lines, and not bumping into the furniture. The camera loves him. What else is there to say? Your 'Orwellian state' is propped up by none other than your John Galt. They need each to exist at all.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 10 months ago | (#44049755)

Correct- they're libertines. Sexual side, or fiscal side, take your pick, they've made liberty their new Goddess.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 10 months ago | (#44051169)

You say that as if we should all submit to oppression. Don't think you'll find much luck there. There is no 'right' to authority, only might. The morality angle is bogus, a thinly veiled attempt to hide powerful bullies.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 10 months ago | (#44051613)

There is no difference between the authority of the libertines and the authority of the government. The government is made up of libertines.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 10 months ago | (#44051749)

No, it's mostly composed of neo-liberals that cater to the ancient system of mercantilism. It's strictly business.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 10 months ago | (#44051971)

There is no profit in mercantilism for reduction of population. It is in fact very bad business to reduce either your labor or consumer supply. Only the fiscal libertine side can be described by this, not the sexual libertine side, so you just revealed yourself to be rather partisan.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 10 months ago | (#44051983)

And it just occurred to me that I have a blind spot due to my Catholicism. It isn't the sexual libertine side. It's the *sensual* libertine side, which includes abuse of alcohol, tobacco, and drugs.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 10 months ago | (#44052725)

Because we are animals with a single motivation, fiscal and sexual cannot be separated, like authority and cruelty. One is used to get more of the other. Doesn't matter which direction.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 10 months ago | (#44054887)

Then why are all the big fiscal liberty families so small? In fact, it's almost a cliche- the richer you are in America, the fewer heirs you have.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about 10 months ago | (#44055097)

There you go again with the materialistic reductionism. Other than an momentary, hedonistic excuse that vanishes upon reflection, I can't fathom what you have to offer.

Re::-) Nice one (0)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | about 10 months ago | (#43976265)

Jesus of Nazareth is the Christ? Then so is everybody else.

3: Jesus said, "If those who lead you say to you, 'See, the Kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, 'It is in the sea,' then the fish will precede you. Rather, the Kingdom is inside of you, and it is outside of you. When you come to know yourselves, then you will become known, and you will realize that it is you who are the sons of the living Father. But if you will not know yourselves, you dwell in poverty and it is you who are that poverty."

29 Jesus said, "If the flesh came into being because of spirit, it is a wonder. But if spirit came into being because of the body, it is a wonder of wonders. Indeed, I am amazed at how this great wealth has made its home in this poverty."

39 Jesus said, "The Pharisees and the scribes have taken the keys of Knowledge and hidden them. They themselves have not entered, nor have they allowed to enter those who wish to. You, however, be as wise as serpents and as innocent as doves."

44 Jesus said, "Whoever blasphemes against the Father will be forgiven, and whoever blasphemes against the Son will be forgiven, but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven either on earth or in heaven."

48 Jesus said, "If two make peace with each other in this one house, they will say to the mountain, 'Move away,' and it will move away."

61 ...Jesus said to her, "Therefore I say, if he is undivided, he will be filled with light, but if he is divided, he will be filled with darkness."

Re::-) Nice one (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 10 months ago | (#44003511)

Very Zen. Should I expect to be told that it's not 'official'? Somebody might waltz in and say, "That's not eeein th' baahble!"

Re::-) Nice one (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 10 months ago | (#44007031)

I'm a Zen Catholic, and even I understand it. Why don't you?

Re::-) Nice one (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 10 months ago | (#44007267)

Who said anything about not understanding? I certainly had no trouble. There are just some people that want to believe that those quotes came from some foreign communist bible and not the Original American one.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 10 months ago | (#44009517)

It must be flag day [blogspot.com] or something. That's the second time today I've run into somebody referring to the Heresy of Americanism [blogspot.com]

Re::-) Nice one (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about 10 months ago | (#44034511)

Original American Bible? What's that noise? King James, baby, from 1611. Arguably equalled, but never exceeded in the English language.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 10 months ago | (#44036541)

I prefer my Bible in Latin. But really, the original *AMERICAN* Bible is the 1611 KJV with several books removed. I always blamed that on Martin Luther, but he just said they were unnecessary; it took American printers working under Capitalism to notice they could sell a thinner Bible for the same amount, less cost, and more profit.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about 10 months ago | (#43978883)

I'm only telling you that your actions prove without any doubt your animal nature still prevails, and that only by arrogance do you place yourself above it all, and try to distance yourself from what you are.

And yet, still, you haven't shown me an alternative.
Nor have I ever explicitly denied an animal nature. In fact, I've got 23 pairs of chromosomes that underscore the existence of such.
Nor do I see how I've placed myself above it all, in positing that there is an universe within which we all sit. I have stated that there is a purpose.
Nor am I seeking to "distance yourself from what [I am]". I'm out to maximize the value of that which I am, through developing it.
Maybe, just maybe, you're ignorant of what you're talking about, amidst your trolling. :-)

Re::-) Nice one (1)

Jerry Smith (806480) | about 10 months ago | (#43982519)

2 + 2 = 10

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2_4+%2B+2_4+ [wolframalpha.com]

Or you might be talking to the wrong people. Or being in the wrong conversation.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about 10 months ago | (#43983099)

Did you mean "2 + 2 = 100"?
If you swapped from base10 to base2 at the equals sign, that would make a twisted form of sense.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

Jerry Smith (806480) | about 10 months ago | (#44004929)

No it's all base 4.
2_4 + 2_4 = 10_4
It makes normal sense, in a base-4-environment. Just like miracles make sense in a biblical environment.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about 10 months ago | (#44034519)

Yeah, it's just that base 4 is not the default.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 10 months ago | (#44036935)

It can be... A person just has to make it so...

Re::-) Nice one (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 10 months ago | (#43986309)

The priests are raping young boys...

Well, sure, they have to until you can give them an alternative. Boys are having sex with boys, and the priests have to have sex with boys to show that having sex with boys is wrong.

Either you can continue living and acting as animals, or you can try to be a human being. Those are your choices, pick one.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about 10 months ago | (#43990465)

Sorry, not Roman Catholic.
As a Baptist, I can tell you that

try to be a human being

is a side-effect of pursuing Jesus Christ. Back atcha.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 10 months ago | (#43990931)

...is a side-effect of pursuing Jesus Christ.

If he is found, he'll end up in Gitmo, if not droned.

And I doubt propping up your favorite bandits is a very good method of 'pursuing Jesus Christ', unless there's some other Jesus Christ on the wrong side of the Rio Grande we are unaware of.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about 10 months ago | (#43993235)

. . .if not droned.

*Sigh* Whatever happened to traditional rejections of Truth, like crucifixion? You kids are so over-caffeinated these days.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 10 months ago | (#43995339)

The truth you're after?? Who would've known? Well you sure won't find it by chasing ghosts and rationalizing premeditated murder by the state (the uber-state!)... Besides that, it will destroy all your preconceptions, so I fully expect an out of hand dismissal as such if you ever bump into it. For some the truth is a wall instead of a window. And crucifixion really has gone out of style, only ceremonially practiced by those kinky types who like to be tied to the bedposts during sex.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 10 months ago | (#44007079)

I can say the same about you....with preconceptions like pedophile priests that turn out to specifically NOT be pedophiles, even when guilty.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 10 months ago | (#44007343)

It's an analogy, ok? The man is rationalizing bad behavior because he claims there's no alternative. To which, the only logical response is, hogwash! When you pursue the 'lesser' evil, you still only get evil.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 10 months ago | (#44009559)

Once I get through your insulting analogies, I kind of agree. Too bad I know that you're also for just the lesser evil.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 10 months ago | (#44011695)

Only a horny priest who can't keep his vows, or just about any other hypocrite would take it as an insult. A regular person would understand the point without having to think twice.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about 10 months ago | (#44034531)

the man is rationalizing bad behavior because he claims there's no alternative

Wut? To claim no alternative, you'd have to destroy free will. And I assure you, I'm not a materialist.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 10 months ago | (#44007057)

Actually, I just had this conversation with somebody who insisted that what the priests did was specifically not pedophila (well, ok, I was relating it to heterosexual men wanting 8 year old girls with precocious puberty, but when you look at the actual cases, NONE of the boys were actually "young" as in under the age of puberty).

Re::-) Nice one (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 10 months ago | (#44007293)

Yeah well, there is that little statutory issue, regardless of whether it's valid or not.

Re::-) Nice one (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 10 months ago | (#44009575)

Which I brought up. To which I was treated with a round of "your definitions are bigoted and illogical and against the Holy Orgasm as preached by St. Freud" or some such equivalent nonsense.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...