Responsibility

[nobspeople]

You get caught breaking the speed limit, you are responsible for the ticket and or court costs, if not more.
Breaking the speed limit without getting caught still opens you to the possibility of potential repercussions.
Yet, you aren't all knowing, powerful, present, etc.
You're simply a mortal, flawed living animal.

All this said, still, people claim we are responsible for our own sins, and the sins of 'our fathers', so to speak (according to some). This same sin was created (or allowed to be created) by the modern christian god (again, according to some).

For discussion:
Where's god's responsibility in all this?
What's god responsibility for when it comes to sin and the everlasting life some claim it can provide? Does providing a sacrifice suffice? Does god not have any responsibility in this - does it get an excuse?

[JoeyKnothead]

...
This nonsense can only be spun for gullible non-witnesses that do not know enough about the inner workings of our organisation.

It's always odd to hear folks call others "gullible" - as they believe in a god that can't be shown to exist.

We Witnesses cannot be duped by yarns...

Yet have fallen for, "He was dead for three days, but got hungry and fetched on off to town for some Mickey D's".

LoutL

That smacked of a 'holier than thou' argument; some may even say pompous and arrogant, while others would say self assured. Strange how perception works, I guess

Yep.

"I'm going me to Heaven !

You, not so much."

[nobspeople]

...
This nonsense can only be spun for gullible non-witnesses that do not know enough about the inner workings of our organisation.

It's always odd to hear folks call others "gullible" - as they believe in a god that can't be shown to exist.

We Witnesses cannot be duped by yarns...

Yet have fallen for, "He was dead for three days, but got hungry and fetched on off to town for some Mickey D's".

LoutL

That smacked of a 'holier than thou' argument; some may even say pompous and arrogant, while others would say self assured. Strange how perception works, I guess

Yep.

"I'm going me to Heaven !

You, not so much."

The thought that someone would relish in another's possibility of experiencing 'eternal damnation' is not very 'christian'. Or is it?
Regardless, these people are sick IMO.

[JoeyKnothead]

The thought that someone would relish in another's possibility of experiencing 'eternal damnation' is not very 'christian'. Or is it?
Regardless, these people are sick IMO.

It seems faulty conclusions, and praise for em, allow some to feel better about their faulty conclusions.

It's a risk / reward calculation. "Either believe like I do, or rot in Hell" seems it a powerful motivator to compel belief in that which can't be shown to be truth.

[nobspeople]

The thought that someone would relish in another's possibility of experiencing 'eternal damnation' is not very 'christian'. Or is it?
Regardless, these people are sick IMO.

It seems faulty conclusions, and praise for em, allow some to feel better about their faulty conclusions.

It's a risk / reward calculation. "Either believe like I do, or rot in Hell" seems it a powerful motivator to compel belief in that which can't be shown to be truth.

I wonder if the originators of christianity created it with a ROI approach?
I suppose it doesn't matter when one's dead - their money has already been spent.
What a racket!

[Purple Knight]

A stopped clock is right twice a day and a blind squirrel sometimes finds a nut, but relying on either one is still foolish.

My point is, you don't know what information the squirrel does and does not have access to because you're not in his head. The squirrel seems to follow stupid reasoning so you declare him blind/foolish. Now this is coming from a genius, but I don't think anybody is as stupid as I think they are (which seems very foolish but it isn't, and this is illustrative of the next sentence). The problem, I think, may usually one of communication, and barriers to it. There are types of information, particularly the data we've accumulated from our experiences that I tend to think is very strong, that cannot be conveyed.

Fools are sometimes right. This means, and think carefully, that we don't know who the fools are unless we're all keeping in our wallets, detailed track records of our correct and incorrect predictions, adjusted for odds, summed up automatically and given fair overall correctness values (CV's) by computers.

I've built up a lot of confidence that my CV is much higher than average, built on the back of the fact that people are very good at knowing when they lose money. So, when I disagree with someone, my go-to is always, well then, if you're so sure, then bet me. People who have known me for a while say, "Don't make bets with that guy."

When the blind squirrel finds a nut and I don't, I don't jump right to, I am blind and he is not, but I do take that success into account. And at the end of the day, if he was right and I was wrong, I can't say for certain that I was not the fool and he the wise man. If there's somebody locked up for thinking Star Trek is real, and it turns out it is, I don't want to hear, "well, he had no way to know that so he is still crazy," I want him apologised to and released.

I don't know the ways he has or doesn't have to know things, and doing otherwise is too deep to sink into a dangerous meta where people are being judged unfairly by what they should think in a world where (if we're right) 80% of the US population is stupid enough to be deceived into thinking you're not dead when you're dead because some part of you that's never been seen or heard bloops out of your body and goes somewhere no one's ever been.

[nobspeople]

[Replying to Purple Knight in post #55]

Fools are sometimes right. This means, and think carefully,

Maybe. Or it could (also) mean they 'got lucky' and were right by no means of their own. How do you know, precisely, which is which?

[Purple Knight]

[Replying to Purple Knight in post #55]

Fools are sometimes right. This means, and think carefully,

Maybe. Or it could (also) mean they 'got lucky' and were right by no means of their own. How do you know, precisely, which is which?

You don't know which is which, and that's the point.

[JoeyKnothead]

...
I've built up a lot of confidence that my CV is much higher than average, built on the back of the fact that people are very good at knowing when they lose money. So, when I disagree with someone, my go-to is always, well then, if you're so sure, then bet me. People who have known me for a while say, "Don't make bets with that guy."
...

"Any man who must say, 'I am the king', is no true king."
- Tywin Lannister

Your arguments are plenty good enough without having to resort to this tactic.

[Purple Knight]

...
I've built up a lot of confidence that my CV is much higher than average, built on the back of the fact that people are very good at knowing when they lose money. So, when I disagree with someone, my go-to is always, well then, if you're so sure, then bet me. People who have known me for a while say, "Don't make bets with that guy."
...

"Any man who must say, 'I am the king', is no true king."
- Tywin Lannister

Your arguments are plenty good enough without having to resort to this tactic.

I don't "must" say it. I just like to.

In this instance though it's explanatory. My best estimate of my own CV is gotten standing on other peoples' backs and feeling around in the dark. Until we have computers handing them out, we really don't know who's the fool.

[JoeyKnothead]

...
Until we have computers handing them out, we really don't know who's the fool.

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt."
- commonly attributed to Abe Lincoln

In all my life, the ones I met who were intelligent never felt the need to tell me how much of it, it is they are.

If only to me, it suggests one who ain't quite certain on what it is they're trying to tell. It reeks of psychological reinforcement.