Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9045 total)
513 online now:
AZPaul3, Christian7 (2 members, 511 visitors)
Newest Member: maria
Upcoming Birthdays: AdminPhat
Post Volume: Total: 887,200 Year: 4,846/14,102 Month: 444/707 Week: 175/197 Day: 64/55 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Religion v Spirituality
pelican
Member (Idle past 3973 days)
Posts: 781
From: australia
Joined: 05-27-2007


Message 106 of 161 (451508)
01-27-2008 9:32 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by Larni
01-27-2008 5:57 AM


Re: Bump fo dameeva.
HELLO LARNI. ARE MY POSTS A GOOD EXAMPLE OF 'BUMPING?'

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by Larni, posted 01-27-2008 5:57 AM Larni has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by Larni, posted 01-28-2008 3:40 AM pelican has not yet responded
 Message 108 by Admin, posted 01-28-2008 10:13 AM pelican has responded

  
Larni
Member
Posts: 3999
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 107 of 161 (451604)
01-28-2008 3:40 AM
Reply to: Message 106 by pelican
01-27-2008 9:32 PM


Re: Bump fo dameeva.
I think there has been more mis understanding of the meaning of 'bump':

Bump means tha I am politely remininding you that there is a post left unanswered by you (in this case post 99 of this thread) where I highlight the woo woo brought to this thread by Heinrik (your point being that he/she had mentioned on woo woo).

As I believe I refuted your point you can rubutt or withdraw.

Post 106 was an excellent example of bumping.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by pelican, posted 01-27-2008 9:32 PM pelican has not yet responded

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12722
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002


Message 108 of 161 (451639)
01-28-2008 10:13 AM
Reply to: Message 106 by pelican
01-27-2008 9:32 PM


Re: Bump fo dameeva.
Hi Dameeva,

Two things:

  1. Regarding this message you've posted in several threads:

    Message 315

    Who is your other account? Let me know and I'll merge your accounts together. You should also tell me which account's settings (account name, password, email, etc.) you want to survive the merge process. You can reply in this thread.

  2. A "bump" post is neutral. It's meant to call a thread or post to someone's attention who might have missed it. It's been a standard approach with on-line discussion boards almost since their inception, and is certainly at least 10 years old.


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by pelican, posted 01-27-2008 9:32 PM pelican has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by pelican, posted 01-28-2008 7:57 PM Admin has responded

  
pelican
Member (Idle past 3973 days)
Posts: 781
From: australia
Joined: 05-27-2007


Message 109 of 161 (451832)
01-28-2008 7:57 PM
Reply to: Message 108 by Admin
01-28-2008 10:13 AM


Re: Bump fo dameeva.
Who is your other account? Let me know and I'll merge your accounts together. You should also tell me which account's settings (account name, password, email, etc.) you want to survive the merge process. You can reply in this thread.

A "bump" post is neutral. It's meant to call a thread or post to someone's attention who might have missed it. It's been a standard approach with on-line discussion boards almost since their inception, and is certainly at least 10 years old.

Thanks for your response. RE-bumping. My issue was having my post dismissed by it being referred to as a 'bump' post. It clearly was not!

There have been so many disrespectful, ignorant, attacking, dismissive, condescending, patronizing responses that this 'bump' excuse to dismiss me was the last straw. I finally spat the dummy.

I tried to get "their attention" by showing I understood "their meaning" by drawing "their attention" to my many, straight in your face, "bumps." But did they get it that I got it? NO.

After 'bumping' my way around the forum I've had another response explaining to me how I misunderstand the meaning. The only one this person saw was the one directly addressed to them.

It seems that many who frequent this forum have no intention of debating or discussing an issue of contention. The same old pattern emerges of 'pack of wolves gang up on underdog,' much to their amusement. I have just seen this happen with Hill Billy. His first time and he was hounded out and not only by members but admin too.

I find the behaviour on this forum to be not much better than primitive, childish in fact. When this behaviour is exibited in adults, it can and does become dangerous. No one sees this except the scapegoats and they have no chance.

This forum is a community just like any other and it becomes hostile to outsiders who are in disagreement, just like any other.

However, I do see some great minds. I just think it is a pity they are so narrow and absorbed in themselves and displaying their 'intelligence' like strutting peacocks.

RE: Other account: The behaviour on this forum was the reason I created another identity in the first place! I felt very alone. I really did not think I could pull it off. I thought these brilliant minds would have rumbled me. You would not be aware of it either if I had not discovered it was against the rule.

I have used these two identities for several months and not one person has been aware enough to spot the identical identities that were blantantly obvious to an open mind. I am not clever enough to play two different characters but it appears clever enough to fool a lot of clever people.

I severely doubt anyone else will even read this post, as it is only addressed to you. If by chance someone does, they will jump on a point to attack and start all over again. Yawn, you clever people are so predictable. Dameeva is retiring.

BUT if you don't mind, I believe one identity is within the rules and I prefer to keep this anonymous as I still want to play with the other kids. Thanks.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by Admin, posted 01-28-2008 10:13 AM Admin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by Trixie, posted 01-28-2008 8:22 PM pelican has responded
 Message 111 by Admin, posted 01-28-2008 8:33 PM pelican has not yet responded

  
Trixie
Member (Idle past 2694 days)
Posts: 1011
From: Edinburgh
Joined: 01-03-2004


Message 110 of 161 (451836)
01-28-2008 8:22 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by pelican
01-28-2008 7:57 PM


Re: Bump fo dameeva.
Hi, I think you still misunderstand the purpose of a "bump". You said yourself that the only "bump" which Admin saw was the one addressed to him and that's the point. It's a way of bringing to the attention of a specific person that you want to get their attention.

You said to Larni

My post wasn't intended as a reminder just for the sake of it. There was a valid point that was connecting each of the quotes.

It wasn't your post that was being called a "bump". Larni was calling his/her own post a "bump".

Honestly, there is no disrespect intended when someone puts a post on the board which says "Bump for ...."

Read the word "bump" as "reminder for". that's all t is.

Sometimes we can lose track of what threads we are posting in and forget to check for replies. I'm grateful if someone posts a "Bump for Trixie" because
1. It brings to my attention a thread I'd forgortten to check
2. It means that someone might be interested in what I have to say

That's all there is to a "bump" post.

The only one of your posts which could be and was described as a "bump" post is

www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=6&t=746&m=91#106 -->www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=6&t=746&m=91#106">http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=6&t=746&m=91#106

The text in the post reads

HELLO LARNI. ARE MY POSTS A GOOD EXAMPLE OF 'BUMPING?'

"Bump" posts do not dismiss you, it's the opposite of this. it doesn't "bump" you down, it actually "bumps" you up!

Sometimes you'll see a "bump" post which just says "bump" with no name attached and that's a way of trying to get anyone to respond. When a name is attached, the "bump" is specifically for the person named, a sort of "Yoohoo, dameeva, I've replied to you, do you wish to respond?".

I'm hanging around in chat if you want any clarification and would be happy to see you there.

That's all it is.

To be perfectly honest, I think I would like to see a few more "Bump for Trixie" posts, but alas, I'm pretty boring.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by pelican, posted 01-28-2008 7:57 PM pelican has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by pelican, posted 01-28-2008 11:42 PM Trixie has responded

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12722
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002


Message 111 of 161 (451840)
01-28-2008 8:33 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by pelican
01-28-2008 7:57 PM


Re: Bump fo dameeva.
Hi Dameeva,

Two things:

  1. You still don't seem to understand what a 'bump' is. This has been explained so clearly so many times now that there seems little point in trying again. I don't know why you're not getting it.

  2. This account is suspended until I find out what the other account is, at which time I'll merge them and you can use that single account. I appreciate the honesty, but I can't go against my own rules.


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by pelican, posted 01-28-2008 7:57 PM pelican has not yet responded

  
pelican
Member (Idle past 3973 days)
Posts: 781
From: australia
Joined: 05-27-2007


Message 112 of 161 (451876)
01-28-2008 11:42 PM
Reply to: Message 110 by Trixie
01-28-2008 8:22 PM


Re: Bump fo dameeva.
Sometimes we can lose track of what threads we are posting in and forget to check for replies. I'm grateful if someone posts a "Bump for Trixie" because
1. It brings to my attention a thread I'd forgortten to check
2. It means that someone might be interested in what I have to say

I thought everyone was notified by email. Aren't you?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by Trixie, posted 01-28-2008 8:22 PM Trixie has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by Trixie, posted 01-29-2008 6:38 AM pelican has responded

  
Trixie
Member (Idle past 2694 days)
Posts: 1011
From: Edinburgh
Joined: 01-03-2004


Message 113 of 161 (451906)
01-29-2008 6:38 AM
Reply to: Message 112 by pelican
01-28-2008 11:42 PM


E-mail notification
Yes, I do get e-mail notification, but for some reason my ISP randomly junks some of them. Also this method depends on me;

1. Checking my e-mails
2. Finding the EvC ones amongst the avalanche of unsolicited spam which tends to bury the important e-mails (over a single 24 hour period I received 342 e-mails, only 15 of which weren't spam)
3. Managing to get to the EvC board and still remember what it is I logged in for. I have a memory like a hen and the attention span of a gnat.

On that basis, I need all the help I can get :D


This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by pelican, posted 01-28-2008 11:42 PM pelican has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by pelican, posted 01-29-2008 7:06 AM Trixie has responded

  
pelican
Member (Idle past 3973 days)
Posts: 781
From: australia
Joined: 05-27-2007


Message 114 of 161 (451910)
01-29-2008 7:06 AM
Reply to: Message 113 by Trixie
01-29-2008 6:38 AM


Re: E-mail notification
(over a single 24 hour period I received 342 e-mails, only 15 of which weren't spam)

Bloody hell! So how does this BUMP mail remind you when it really only stays at the top for a short while and also shouldn\t the bump message inform you of the post number you have missed? One last one on this because it's way off topic and I don't fancy being barred. I'll be bored shitless :)

Is the bump message sent to your email? I haven't had one you see.

Whoops I've just realized that I began this thread and with all the drama I forgot.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by Trixie, posted 01-29-2008 6:38 AM Trixie has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by Trixie, posted 01-29-2008 9:28 AM pelican has not yet responded

  
pelican
Member (Idle past 3973 days)
Posts: 781
From: australia
Joined: 05-27-2007


Message 115 of 161 (451912)
01-29-2008 7:30 AM
Reply to: Message 96 by Stile
01-25-2008 3:52 PM


Re: So what is it?
That's not what I learned from the physical world. The physical world only taught me that the physical world does not offer a meaning to our existance.

I said exactly the same thing but you disagree with me. I did not say there was no meaning in spirituality.

When I realized this, it was easy to realize that I could give meaning to my existance in any way I'd like. Much more freedom that way. And it's obvious that it takes much more strength to impose a righteous meaning on your own existance than it is to have it given to you from any external source.

Well maybe you jsu hit the nail right on the head. That could well be the meaning of life.

Are you able to unblock this expansion somehow? Are you able to show how to be more aware of any misconceptions? Or can you identify any of these awareness-blocking misconceptions?

I am preparing a topic to show the misconceptions some have with E=MC2 so we will see.

Are you able to provide one? What is it? You seem to be very hesitant to expand on giving any information. Is there a problem with sharing this information?

Actually yes. It has taken me many years of painful experiences to reach the point at where I understand the real nature of spirituality. I don't wish to re-experience the painful emotions by rabbiting on about things people don't have a clue about for nothing.
However, I am willing to answer any genuine questions that may arise.

Is this what your 'down to earth' spiritual existance does? Does it remove your desire to help others? Or maybe it reduces your freedom to only answering direct questions? I hope this message will suffice.

It certainly has. In truth it has increased my desire to help, but up til now (and including this forum) my ideas have antagonized people beyond belief. I have been pummled!
So now I try to tread a little more tentatively and wait until I am asked.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Stile, posted 01-25-2008 3:52 PM Stile has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 119 by Stile, posted 01-29-2008 10:11 AM pelican has responded

  
Granny Magda
Member (Idle past 41 days)
Posts: 2383
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007


Message 116 of 161 (451919)
01-29-2008 8:02 AM
Reply to: Message 101 by pelican
01-27-2008 5:54 PM


Re: Still No Useful Definition of Spirituality
Heinrik writes:

What is your definition of spirituality WITHIN the religious or supernatural context?

Oh, closeness to God, relationship with God, questing after religious truth, unity with the tents of one's chosen faith, unity between body and soul, that sort of thing. This sort of thing in fact;

The Free Dictionary writes:

spir·i·tu·al
adj.
1. Of, relating to, consisting of, or having the nature of spirit; not tangible or material.
2. Of, concerned with, or affecting the soul.
3. Of, from, or relating to God; deific.
4. Of or belonging to a church or religion; sacred.
5. Relating to or having the nature of spirits or a spirit; supernatural.

Of course, as an atheist, I don't believe in any of those things, so in a way spirituality still means nothing to me. The point is that "spirituality, when used in an explicitly religious/supernatural context, has a useful meaning, ie, it successfully communicates an idea.
Outside of this context, "spirituality" has had its meaning diluted, by everyone having their own pet definition and general misuse by flaky new-agers. It has become useless as a word, because its meaning is too protean to provide a useful tool in communicating our ideas.


Mutate and Survive

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by pelican, posted 01-27-2008 5:54 PM pelican has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by pelican, posted 01-29-2008 9:26 AM Granny Magda has responded

  
pelican
Member (Idle past 3973 days)
Posts: 781
From: australia
Joined: 05-27-2007


Message 117 of 161 (451927)
01-29-2008 9:26 AM
Reply to: Message 116 by Granny Magda
01-29-2008 8:02 AM


Re: Still No Useful Definition of Spirituality
The Free Dictionary writes:
spir·i·tu·al
adj.
1. Of, relating to, consisting of, or having the nature of spirit; not tangible or material.
2. Of, concerned with, or affecting the soul.
3. Of, from, or relating to God; deific.
4. Of or belonging to a church or religion; sacred.
5. Relating to or having the nature of spirits or a spirit; supernatural.

Spirit, a. The vital principle or animating force within living beings.
b. Incorporeal consciousness.
2. The soul, considered as departing from the body of a person at death.
3. Spirit The Holy Spirit.
4. A supernatural being, as:
a. An angel or a demon.
b. A being inhabiting or embodying a particular place, object, or natural phenomenon.
c. A fairy or sprite.

If we put the first definition of spiritual and the first definition of spirit together, neither of them contain the supernatural.
So in my own words, my definition of 'spirituality' is a non-physical entity that is the energy which connects and permeates all living things.
I believe this energy is felt by us all, directed by us all and changes form as, and through us, individually and collectively.
If you could come up with a better less ambiguous title I would be glad to use it but I doubt I would inspire any interest. I have to work with what I've got. regards


This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by Granny Magda, posted 01-29-2008 8:02 AM Granny Magda has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by Granny Magda, posted 01-29-2008 10:13 AM pelican has responded
 Message 123 by Larni, posted 01-29-2008 11:28 AM pelican has not yet responded
 Message 124 by Larni, posted 01-29-2008 11:29 AM pelican has not yet responded

  
Trixie
Member (Idle past 2694 days)
Posts: 1011
From: Edinburgh
Joined: 01-03-2004


Message 118 of 161 (451928)
01-29-2008 9:28 AM
Reply to: Message 114 by pelican
01-29-2008 7:06 AM


Re: E-mail notification
Last one, I promise Admins - it jus gives a bit of continuity here.

If the person who "bumps" does so by clicking on the "eply To" button, then you will get an e-mail. If they do it as a "General Reply" you won't.

I don't know about others, but I peruse the board using the "All Topics" button at the top. If a post disappears onto page 2 of the "All Topics" bit, there is less chance of it being seen. A new post will bring the topic back to the top of the first page. If you hve nothing new to add, but you want a reply, posting an empty post with the word "Bump" in the title has the same effect and is one of the few times that empty posts are allowed. A link to the post number which is being "bumped" is sometimes included by the writer, but it's usually not done as most of us honestly are too lazy and can't be arsed. Hope this clears it all up :D

It is a neat system, it does work.

Normal service is now resumed :D


This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by pelican, posted 01-29-2008 7:06 AM pelican has not yet responded

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4042
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 119 of 161 (451939)
01-29-2008 10:11 AM
Reply to: Message 115 by pelican
01-29-2008 7:30 AM


So, again, what is it?
Heinrik writes:

Stile writes:

That's not what I learned from the physical world. The physical world only taught me that the physical world does not offer a meaning to our existance.

I said exactly the same thing but you disagree with me. I did not say there was no meaning in spirituality.

You're missing my point. I'm not talking about a meaning in spirituality either. I'm talking about a meaning in the physical world.

You said "There was and is no meaning to our existance" (as far as the physical world is concerned). That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying there certainly is a physical meaning to our existance, it's just not provided to us by the physical world itself. We certainly can create a physical meaning for ourselves in the physical world.

However, I am willing to answer any genuine questions that may arise.

...

So now I try to tread a little more tentatively and wait until I am asked.

I, um... I thought I did ask. That's what all these questions were for:

quote:
Are you able to provide one? What is it?

...

Is this what your 'down to earth' spiritual existance does?


I really would just like for you to explain whatever it is you're talking about.

But you did mention this:

I am preparing a topic to show the misconceptions some have with E=MC2 so we will see.

I don't understand what E=MC2 has to do with it, but if you meant you're preparing a new thread to discuss all the questions I've asked (along with everyone elses), then I'll wait for that.

I don't really know what's wrong with answering the questions in this thread, but if you really think another is best, then I'll wait to see what kind of information you actually have to share.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by pelican, posted 01-29-2008 7:30 AM pelican has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 121 by pelican, posted 01-29-2008 11:00 AM Stile has responded

  
Granny Magda
Member (Idle past 41 days)
Posts: 2383
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007


Message 120 of 161 (451940)
01-29-2008 10:13 AM
Reply to: Message 117 by pelican
01-29-2008 9:26 AM


Re: Still No Useful Definition of Spirituality
Heinrik writes:

So in my own words, my definition of 'spirituality' is a non-physical entity that is the energy which connects and permeates all living things.

The problem with this definition is twofold. Firstly, your definition is far from widespread, and it has too much competition from other peoples definitions to be clear.
Secondly, there is no such thing as "energy which connects and permeates all living things", save for physical forces such as electromagnetism. If that is what you mean, why not call it "electromagnetism"? Talk of "energy", in my view, an attempt to dress supernatural ideas (specifically the soul or spirit in this instance) in the clothing of science. "The vital principle or animating force within living beings." has no real basis in science and is entirely supernatural in nature. If this "energy" truly exists, please give some kind of evidence to demonstrate that. Until then, I think it is just more woo-woo.


Mutate and Survive

This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by pelican, posted 01-29-2008 9:26 AM pelican has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 122 by pelican, posted 01-29-2008 11:15 AM Granny Magda has responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021