 | | 4. Why are some nonbelievers admirable people?
|
|
(...) I'm not going to debate this, because there have been a lot. Just like the Christian has to ask "Why are some atheists, Mormons and Jews decent people?" (DUCK NOW!) the atheist wonders "Why are some Christians good people?" The reality is most (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | 3. What exactly is bigotry? More definitions. Trolling admitted.
|
|
(...) Well, I guess it was a troll. But I left off the really bad names! I don't think Christianity has much power to form character traits like intellectual curiosity, productivity, attentiveness, and hipness, so more second-generation Christians (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | 2. The Good Life
|
|
(...) The Good Life. Aristotle said the good life was to become happy by pursuing the best goals, that is, to excel in whatever you are capable of. To be the best example of what you are. That you are the purpose of your own life, there is no higher (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | 1. Vs. Original Sin
|
|
(...) I don't recall such a thing in any other creed. Is this article of faith meant to quibble with or clarify Paul? Not sure myself whether Paul is as important to Mormons, as he is to say Lutherans or Baptists (who make a very big deal out of (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet for beginners
|
|
(...) In the same way that calling Lego brand building blocks "legos" is trademark dilution. In the same way that calling facial tissue "Kleenex" is. Well, not precisely the same, because those usages probably aren't negative, just dilutive, but (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet for beginners
|
|
Moved to off-topic.debate (...) Huh? Maybe there's some facet of trademark law I'm unfamiliar with, but how is *discussing* a product, even in negative terms, a trademark dilution? Are you seriously suggesting that saying something negative (even as (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet for beginners
|
|
(...) I've (...) I believe his characterization of IE would fall under (political) parody and is therefore fair use. The other possibility is that he meant it as fact, which he would be completely justified as claiming, even in court. I'm not sure (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why do we know all of this? (was Re: evolution)
|
|
(...) And, I must jump in, cause, well, I do, but if I remember my History of Anthropology course (if only I could find my notes!) it was actually Herbert Spencer (a wild and wacky social darwinist) coined that term. (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why do we know all of this? (was Re: evolution)
|
|
(...) Ack! >_<;; I took "The evolution of human nature" (aka intro to sociobiology) which the first third of the class focused on "real" evolution. Then in my "history of anthropology" (aka anthro theory) class, we started out with some of the (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
