The people behind a great post...

Missed this Ringo. My heart stopped for a while. I agree with some of what you say but can't fit that into a reason for the data being as it is I agree very often with the basic arguments of my fellow FAs. This doesn't explain why it is their posts illict potms from the 'other sides'.Indeed my agreement with them doesn't mean that I don't find their posts insightful and well argued. Which raises another question. FAs don't tend to potm their own side. Agreed. So when nominating the usually misaligned views align on an issue and bingo! a potm. But why always against this single viewpoint?. There are many other viewpoints on show. But these don't result in potms. Why the unifying against one single viewpoint?

An interim update showing a "table of possibe reasons for the Potm situation" is included in the OP

It's called "bias," iano.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Again, please read what I have written.In Message 40 I said: So yes, as I pointed out back in Message 40 you would expect most of the reponses to be in the philosophical forums.As to using the appropriate language, I may well be wrong. It appears that regardless of the language used, science based or non-scientific, it may well be impossible to communicate with Faith Alone folk.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Any ideas as to the reason for that bias RR? Or is it kind of like a banner under which "dislike of the doctrine/dislike of the person" march - reasons you mentioned earlier?

It's called "consensus," robin.P.S. A co-worker, knowing I collect bird figures, brought me an almost 20 year old Bald Eagle Decanter of 12 year old (when bottled) Jim Beam Bourbon. At about the same time, my surgeon ordered me to completely forego hard liquor: that prohibition will expire right about the time of our 20th wedding anniversary.Thus, I plan to end my long night in the desert on that occasion with 32 year old bourbon.Coincidence? Maybe there is someone up there working in mysterious ways.

---

Who owns the whole rainy, stony earth? Death.
Who owns all of space? Death.Who is stronger than hope? Death.
Who is stronger than the will? Death.
Stronger than love? Death.
Stronger than life? Death.But who is stronger than Death?
Me, evidently.Pass, Crow.Ted Hughes, from "Examination at the Womb-Door" Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!
---------------------------------------

People here tend to find against any post that they consider to be unsupported or unsupportable. It is many peoples view (and most likely mine) that a lot of the FA themed posts become very quickly and very obviously unsupportable.The FA posters have a habit (no doubt born through bible study and excessive exposure to preachers and their rhetoric) of becoming lost in analogy and dicrete (and not so discrete) attempts to move goalposts, avoid direct questions and generally ignore the arguments placed before them.such behaviour requires that the person posing the opposing argument lay it out in such a way that no amount of rhetoric, handwaving or downright dishonesty can help the FA-er dig themselves out of the hole they so often jump into.

The non-believers are in cahoots with the Christian liberals against the Fundies--this despite the fact that "Christian evolutionism" doesn't have a logical leg to stand on. But the non-believers figure that if one has to choose, the liberals are at least harmless ("My enemy's enemy is my friend").The stance taken by the non-believers is political rather than logical. I ain't into politics myself.

Christianity has no logical legs at all. One can accept the creed on faith and then use logic to work out ethics, theology, etc., but there is no logical foundation for any religious belief. That's why they call it faith.

Well, in my view nihilism is the only logical stance.However, there should be no quarter given against the liberal Christians either. And on this forum there is huge quarter given.

---

"The whole of life goes like this. We seek repose by battling against difficulties, and once they are overcome, repose becomes unbearable because of the boredom it engenders."--Pascal

Liberal Christians tend to hold and express their faith as purely faith: they do not attempt to bend reason or science to religion's work or to impose their faith and its mandates on others.It is in the intersection of the freedom to believe or not, and freedom from the impositions of others' beliefs, that liberal Christians and non-believers come together. That they come together in what appears to be an alliance against fundamentalists speaks more to the agenda of the fundamentalist than any agenda shared by liberal Christians and non-believers.

I do have to admit to reading some of your posts poorly Jar. Sorry about that. In my defence however I do tend to pick up aspects in your musings which sound little bells in my head and show me that things aren't always "as simple as that"Communicating with them is not talking to them in a language they understand so much as talking to them in a language demanded by the topic. Although I suppose strictly speaking, you are correct. You are talking...TTIALTU - in exactly the same way as they are talking TYIALYU. Otherwise you wouldn't be communicating I supposeI have you pegged in the OP interim result as one who takes the "rebuttal of foolish positions" category. If your happy then fine. If you want to change or have other reasons in mind which aren't broadly covered in the OP then fire away.

By all means debate Robin but I was wondering whether you had a view on the 'data' contained in the OP Omni. I would be interested in your take on it.If doing so, note that a faith aloner is not necessarily a fundi OR a liberal: I know examples of faith aloners in both camps. Me - I'm faith aloner. Me? I no evolution. Me, you can chose to believe and practice whatever you like. Me? I think 32 year old burbon is Satans spittle and can offer it a good home for it if you like.

Again, I'm not sure I understand. If I am talking TTIALTU and they are talking TYIALYU then communication is very unlikely and it's time to stop and try to clarify things. No, that's a fine position. Often the most important act one can perform is to rebut foolish positions. Yes, that most definitely describes what I attempt to do. Simple, as I have often said, does not imply easy.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

It would weigh too heavily on even my pagan conscience, iano. Perhaps God has a purpose even for unbelievers like me--like blotting up all such Satan's spittle to protect the righteous such as yourself.I'll trot back to the OP and take a look, though my comments were directed at the notion of a liberal Christian/nonbeliever alliance against fundamentalists introduced by Robin rather than the, er, topic.