Finally I located the post of Sandorski where he betrayed his very low IQ. (See records below.)
He betrayed it in his lack of careful thinking when he gives an example of what is argument and an example of what is demonstration, they are not different but the same: both are examples of demonstration, neither is an example of argument.
To wit, observe carefully his examples but wrong of what is argument and what is demonstration, as follow:
:: Argument - If a Ball is dropped it will fall to the floor
:: Demonstration - Holding a ball then dropping it
Do you notice, dear readers and honest intelligent productive posters here, the two examples are both demonstration, neither one is any example of what is an argument.
.
That is why I find Sandorski to be impossible to connect with, because the man has a most primitive low IQ: he cannot even imagine that it is the same picture that is conveyed, though with different positioning of words and sentence construction - they are the same picture, in the present context it is what we call a video of a person holding a ball and letting it fall off his hand, and the ball dropping on the floor.
::
::
From shallow and un-imaginative posters here, Oh Lord, deliver us.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
He betrayed it in his lack of careful thinking when he gives an example of what is argument and an example of what is demonstration, they are not different but the same: both are examples of demonstration, neither is an example of argument.
To wit, observe carefully his examples but wrong of what is argument and what is demonstration, as follow:
:: Argument - If a Ball is dropped it will fall to the floor
:: Demonstration - Holding a ball then dropping it
Do you notice, dear readers and honest intelligent productive posters here, the two examples are both demonstration, neither one is any example of what is an argument.
.
That is why I find Sandorski to be impossible to connect with, because the man has a most primitive low IQ: he cannot even imagine that it is the same picture that is conveyed, though with different positioning of words and sentence construction - they are the same picture, in the present context it is what we call a video of a person holding a ball and letting it fall off his hand, and the ball dropping on the floor.
::
::
From shallow and un-imaginative posters here, Oh Lord, deliver us.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
sandorski
No Lifer
- Oct 10, 1999
- 70,098
- 5,639
- 126
Dear everyone, I guess it is impossible to connect with Sandorski, because he cannot accept the fact that he is of low IQ, in addition he is self-deceiving, by insisting that my observation on him is 'incorrect'.
Anyway, addressing Sandorski, please explain why you say that I am 'incorrect'?
Anyway, addressing Sandorski, please explain why you say that I am 'incorrect'?
.
- Oct 10, 1999
- 30,875
- 12,381
- 136
God-bot is trying to pick a fight with Sandorski?
This won't end well, troll-bot.
Dear everyone, I am not picking a fight with anyone, but just to invite posters to engage in honest intelligent productive discussion with me.
I care to learn something of useful information and knowledge from everyone.
And but I just require that everyone be disposed to define whatever words they use in expounding on their view, because if a thinker/writer cannot or will not define words he uses, then he does not know what he is talking about - that's obvious, isn't it?
Next, that everyone knows what is existence and can and will put in words what he knows is existence, at least insofar as he is concerned - about what is existence.
Existence is such a very very very to the nth number broad word and concept - everything is an example of existence.
Okay, dear my opponents here, starting with Sandorski, give me an example of something that is not covered by the word and concept, existence.
.
I care to learn something of useful information and knowledge from everyone.
And but I just require that everyone be disposed to define whatever words they use in expounding on their view, because if a thinker/writer cannot or will not define words he uses, then he does not know what he is talking about - that's obvious, isn't it?
Next, that everyone knows what is existence and can and will put in words what he knows is existence, at least insofar as he is concerned - about what is existence.
Existence is such a very very very to the nth number broad word and concept - everything is an example of existence.
Okay, dear my opponents here, starting with Sandorski, give me an example of something that is not covered by the word and concept, existence.
.
I ask you all, dear readers and my opponents here, and atheists:
"Okay, dear my opponents here, starting with Sandorski, give me an example of something that is not covered by the word and concept, existence."
Think, dear everyone, what about the word and concept of "nothing"?
"Okay, dear my opponents here, starting with Sandorski, give me an example of something that is not covered by the word and concept, existence."
Think, dear everyone, what about the word and concept of "nothing"?
WelshBloke
Lifer
- Jan 12, 2005
- 30,426
- 8,093
- 136
I'm not convinced that he isn't just an idiot now rather than a bot. I'd like to think that our technology is more advanced than this.
Dear everyone, including but specially my opponents here who are calling me a bot, and also atheists, you know what, I now know why robots cannot be like humans, and you know why?
BECAUSE only humans can lie to themselves and they know it but they hide themselves from their lies, in order that at least they attain some psychological balance in their peculiarly human life, still that kind of a psychological balance is not healthy, because they then lack self-honesty.
And that is why only humans go to psychological experts like psychiatrists to help them put themselves in psychological health.
There.
And the best or worst self-liars are militant atheists.
.
BECAUSE only humans can lie to themselves and they know it but they hide themselves from their lies, in order that at least they attain some psychological balance in their peculiarly human life, still that kind of a psychological balance is not healthy, because they then lack self-honesty.
And that is why only humans go to psychological experts like psychiatrists to help them put themselves in psychological health.
There.
And the best or worst self-liars are militant atheists.
.
- Oct 10, 1999
- 30,875
- 12,381
- 136
Okay, Iron Woode, and Oh ye my opponents here, you have been with me here since the start of this thread.
I really love to learn something from you all, to enrich my life.
What can you teach me, as to enrich my life?
.
ch33zw1z
Lifer
- Nov 4, 2004
- 37,759
- 18,039
- 146
Lol, amazing. I'm not a big anime guy, but may have to check that one out.
I haven't really touch this thread at all, mostly cuz it seemed a little ridiculous. My personal take on belief versus religion is that belief can be healthy for some, but religion is man's way of twisting something positive into something negative.
What I have found out about God is that it can be whatever you want it to be. Human history has shown us that people groups can create vastly different explanations (but similar methods) of grasping our existence, which is where belief, rituals, religion, etc really are rooted. People needed a way to explain a purpose to life and a purpose to it ending, so God(s) / belief in a higher purpose fit the bill nicely.
Not everyone needs belief, or God(s) to feel a sense of purpose. And religions can gtfo as far as I'm concerned.
sdifox
No Lifer
- Sep 30, 2005
- 94,929
- 15,080
- 126
KonoSuba is pretty funny. Two seasons and a movie. Hopefully they'll make season three.
Dear ch33zw1z:
Have we met before?
Anyway, I see that you are my dream of a gentleman intellectual here in AnandTech forums, so I congratulate myself for meeting you, there is always one or two exceptions to non-gentlemen non-intellectuals.
You say:
"What I have found out about God is that it can be whatever you want it to be."
Suppose you and I, we work out together to agree on a concept of God, so that we can be talking about the same thing, is that okay with you?
Here is my concept of God:
"God in concept is the creator cause of man and the universe and everything with a beginning."
So, tell me, what is your concept of God, and I don't mean your convinced concept of God, but just what is the information of the concept of God, which enables you to know what God knowers are talking about, I am a God knower, when they deal with the issue God exists or not.
I am going to enjoy talking with you, as I hope you will also enjoy talking with me.
For your orientation, please read the OP:
:
Have we met before?
Anyway, I see that you are my dream of a gentleman intellectual here in AnandTech forums, so I congratulate myself for meeting you, there is always one or two exceptions to non-gentlemen non-intellectuals.
You say:
"What I have found out about God is that it can be whatever you want it to be."
Suppose you and I, we work out together to agree on a concept of God, so that we can be talking about the same thing, is that okay with you?
Here is my concept of God:
"God in concept is the creator cause of man and the universe and everything with a beginning."
So, tell me, what is your concept of God, and I don't mean your convinced concept of God, but just what is the information of the concept of God, which enables you to know what God knowers are talking about, I am a God knower, when they deal with the issue God exists or not.
I am going to enjoy talking with you, as I hope you will also enjoy talking with me.
For your orientation, please read the OP:
:
ch33zw1z
Lifer
- Nov 4, 2004
- 37,759
- 18,039
- 146
First, no offense intended here, but I suspect the English language is not your first language, some of your grammar makes communication with an English primary difficult.
Second, it appears you're asking me to agree with your concept of a god. Then you take that and ask me to change what I am a knower of, facts, and create some concept of god to compare to your concept of god. You seem to do this because you think I can't understand a "God knower" without being a "God knower".
What you're asking of me wont happen. I was raised a "God knower" and have changed my opinion because humanities fantastical way of creating belief systems in various forms to deal with the world and all its happiness and cruelty.
From polytheism to monotheism, good intentions, bad intentions, selfish and selfless motivations, one cannot express belief without faith. There will always be facts missing from a creator belief system, this reliance on that guy feeling is paramount
I'm what you'd call an agnostic, with a side order of anti-organized religion.
WRT the OP, you probably can't "get God to talk with me" because your concept of communication is not your god's concept of communication 😉
In conclusion, you're entitled to believe what you want. Where I draw the line is if your beliefs create negative effects to your surroundings.
Last edited:
- Oct 10, 1999
- 30,875
- 12,381
- 136
you really want to learn something?
Start another thread about a completely different topic and see what may be learned.
Dear Iron Woode:
You propose that I start a new thread, then I might learn something from Oh ye my opponents?
You mean that you Oh ye my opponents here, you guys are like old dogs (no offense intended to genuine old dogs, man's best friends), you cannot learn new tricks?
You are just like your mendacious masters of nonsense ideas, like one Richard Dawkins, full of delusions while he dares to pontificate that God is a delusion, without ever presenting what to him is the concept of God at all - that is some delusion from his part.
Okay, look up some old thinkers or much better, think about what is existence and you might come to new tricks on how to rebut my thread here, on the existence of God, in concept as the creator cause of man and the universe and everything with a beginning.
You propose that I start a new thread, then I might learn something from Oh ye my opponents?
You mean that you Oh ye my opponents here, you guys are like old dogs (no offense intended to genuine old dogs, man's best friends), you cannot learn new tricks?
You are just like your mendacious masters of nonsense ideas, like one Richard Dawkins, full of delusions while he dares to pontificate that God is a delusion, without ever presenting what to him is the concept of God at all - that is some delusion from his part.
Okay, look up some old thinkers or much better, think about what is existence and you might come to new tricks on how to rebut my thread here, on the existence of God, in concept as the creator cause of man and the universe and everything with a beginning.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 9K
-
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
-
Facebook
Twitter