Homosexuality is not a sin!

[PaulS]

4 hours ago, thormas said:

Say what? I was not the one who said it so Joseph would be the logical one to answer your question if you want to know.

Thormas, I think perhaps you are misreading Rom.  To me, it reads that Rom is asking you, what you think 'heat' is.  You weren't the first to bring 'heat' up but you did say things about heat such as "...but as with heat, depending where they are on the continuum..." and "I get that we can say that heat exists and cold is merely the progressive absence of heat on a continuum", and so on, so it would be a reasonable assumption that you have some idea in your head of what heat is, which is perhaps different to Joseph (as you did initially consider cold to be the opposite of heat when in fact cold doesn't exist per se, as explained by Joseph).

In that regard I don't think Rom's question was unreasonable as he is asking you, what you think 'heat' is.

That's how I read it anyway.

I'm sure he knows to ask Joseph if he wants to further understand what Joseph thinks heat is.

[thormas]

10 hours ago, PaulS said:

Thormas, I think perhaps you are misreading Rom..........

The discussion of the continuum was the primary focus and heat just an example. I refer you both to Joseph and then, if interested, we can all chip in.

Any use of heat by me was to flesh out Joseph's point and have him affirm or redirect that understanding of his perspective. As to cold, it does 'exist' (so to speak) at one end of the temperature continuum but even if we look at it as 'less heat' than hot, it is so 'different' than hot and so far from hot on a continuum that for all intents and purposes it is 'opposite' in its effect and the reaction to it.

But, thanks for the interpretation :+} 

[JosephM]

To the point.........   Opposites are an illusion. They are created by people and not what they seem to be.  However useful opposites seem to be in organizing ourselves or simplifying our life, they simply do not exist except as arbitrary points on a continuum  in our mind. I have used hot and cold as an example because it seems to me the easiest to understand but it is applicable to good and evil, right and wrong,  pleasure and pain, love and hate, beautiful and ugly, rich and poor, success and failure..... and even life and death.   My original point was/is that overcoming or transcending the polarity of opposites we have created  goes a long way toward establishing a peaceful, forgiving and harmonious life here on earth and even on this forum. 😄

[PaulS]

1 hour ago, thormas said:

Any use of heat by me was to flesh out Joseph's point and have him affirm or redirect that understanding of his perspective. As to cold, it does 'exist' (so to speak) at one end of the temperature continuum but even if we look at it as 'less heat' than hot, it is so 'different' than hot and so far from hot on a continuum that for all intents and purposes it is 'opposite' in its effect and the reaction to it.

But to use the term 'heat' to flesh out Joseph's point, then presumably you must have some understanding of it, no?  And if you do have some understanding of it, what's the problem with Rom asking you how you understand the term 'heat'?

For me, I am wondering myself now how you understand heat to determine where exactly 'cold' sits on the continuum scale so as to be 'opposite' to heat?  Can you name a temperature where 'cold' is 'opposite' to heat?   Where exactly does 'cold' sit on the heat continuum scale?  Where abouts at 'one end' of the temperature continuum does cold sit exactly?  How 'far' away from 'heat' does cold actually sit on the heat continuum scale? 

Can I ask as an aside, what does this expression ( :+} ) actually mean?

[thormas]

1 minute ago, PaulS said:

But to use the term 'heat' to flesh out Joseph's point, then presumably you must have some understanding of it, no?  And if you do have some understanding of it, what's the problem with Rom asking you how you understand the term 'heat'?

For me, I am wondering myself now how you understand heat to determine where exactly 'cold' sits on the continuum scale so as to be 'opposite' to heat?  Can you name a temperature where 'cold' is 'opposite' to heat?   Where exactly does 'cold' sit on the heat continuum scale?  Where abouts at 'one end' of the temperature continuum does cold sit exactly?  How 'far' away from 'heat' does cold actually sit?  How 'far' is cold from heat?

Actually, no it was not a subject, as you know, that we delved into. As stated, that was Joseph's example (one of a 4 or 5) and so since he used it, I responded in kind. Rather polite and simple.

He also used right/wrong and God/devil so we could always get into one of those :+} 

Feel free.

[Burl]

1 hour ago, JosephM said:

To the point.........   Opposites are an illusion. They are created by people and not what they seem to be.  However useful opposites seem to be in organizing ourselves or simplifying our life, they simply do not exist except as arbitrary points on a continuum  in our mind. I have used hot and cold as an example because it seems to me the easiest to understand but it is applicable to good and evil, right and wrong,  pleasure and pain, love and hate, beautiful and ugly, rich and poor, success and failure..... and even life and death.   My original point was/is that overcoming or transcending the polarity of opposites we have created  goes a long way toward establishing a peaceful, forgiving and harmonious life here on earth and even on this forum. 😄

Flip a coin.  Heads or tails?

[JosephM]

2 hours ago, Burl said:

Flip a coin.  Heads or tails?

Yes, same coin, with 2 different arbitrary views. created by man for convenience.

Edited December 20, 2019 by JosephM
changed

[PaulS]

On 12/20/2019 at 10:55 PM, thormas said:

Actually, no it was not a subject, as you know, that we delved into. As stated, that was Joseph's example (one of a 4 or 5) and so since he used it, I responded in kind. Rather polite and simple.

He also used right/wrong and God/devil so we could always get into one of those :+} 

Feel free.

I think it was a subject as you were responding to Joseph's example with some points about heat yourself, which themselves seemed incongruous with the understanding of heat that Joseph was presenting, so I think it's only fair that Rom should ask you how you understand heat.  As I just did in my last post also (maybe you thought all those question marks were rhetorical).

Of course we could get into one of the others topics, but heat was the question you were being asked about.  Following Rom asking you, I was asking you also,  because you seem to double down on your position about heat  when you say "...if we look at it as 'less heat' than hot, it is so 'different' than hot and so far from hot on a continuum that for all intents and purposes it is 'opposite' in its effect and the reaction to it".  Yet you seem to now take exception at being asked to explain your understanding of heat when asked.  

 Frankly, I don't care if you refuse to answer the question.  I'm just noting that it was a reasonable question to be asked by Rom, that you were misreading him by pointing him to Joseph only,  and that whilst you might prefer to discuss another topic such as God/Devil or right/wrong, that wasn't what you were being asked about. 

But fair enough if you don't want to answer - that's your prerogative. 

[PaulS]

7 hours ago, Burl said:

Flip a coin.  Heads or tails?

Don't forget the 1 in 6000 chance of a nickel landing on its edge - it's not as simple as only heads or tails.

[Burl]

2 hours ago, PaulS said:

Don't forget the 1 in 6000 chance of a nickel landing on its edge - it's not as simple as only heads or tails.

You remind me of a man . . . 

[thormas]

On 12/21/2019 at 7:19 AM, PaulS said:

I think it was a subject as you were responding to Joseph's example with some points about heat yourself, which themselves seemed incongruous with the understanding of heat that Joseph was presenting, so I think it's only fair that Rom should ask you how you understand heat.  As I just did in my last post also (maybe you thought all those question marks were rhetorical).

Of course we could get into one of the others topics, but heat was the question you were being asked about.  Following Rom asking you, I was asking you also,  because you seem to double down on your position about heat  when you say "...if we look at it as 'less heat' than hot, it is so 'different' than hot and so far from hot on a continuum that for all intents and purposes it is 'opposite' in its effect and the reaction to it".  Yet you seem to now take exception at being asked to explain your understanding of heat when asked.  

 Frankly, I don't care if you refuse to answer the question.  I'm just noting that it was a reasonable question to be asked by Rom, that you were misreading him by pointing him to Joseph only,  and that whilst you might prefer to discuss another topic such as God/Devil or right/wrong, that wasn't what you were being asked about. 

But fair enough if you don't want to answer - that's your prerogative. 

 

For a guy who says he doesn't care you sure seem to care a bit too much.

"Cold is less heat than hot" -  simple yet profound :+}

 

I am glad you think it is a subject and if Rom does too, you can, as he said, play with him.

I will stick to the topic of interest: the continuum. I might continue to go back and forth with Joseph, using heat or some of his other examples, to determine if I understand the gist of his position ............before determining if I agree or to what degree I agree. Heat is merely a means to an end ;+}  

But thanks for caring.

[PaulS]

2 hours ago, thormas said:

For a guy who says he doesn't care you sure seem to care a bit too much.

"Cold is less heat than hot" -  simple yet profound :+}

I am glad you think it is a subject and if Rom does too, you can, as he said, play with him.

I will stick to the topic of interest: the continuum. I might continue to go back and forth with Joseph, using heat or some of his other examples, to determine if I understand the gist of his position ............before determining if I agree or to what degree I agree. Heat is merely a means to an end ;+}  

But thanks for caring.

Whatever you need to tell yourself, Thormas.

[JosephM]

11 hours ago, thormas said:

(snip)

"Cold is less heat than hot" -  simple yet profound :+}

(snip)

 

Your definition agrees with (meteorology) cold fronts which is a  temperature that is colder (has less heat) than the air it is displacing. The word as used for cold in cold front is an arbitrary temperature as it is only in relation to the existing temperature it is replacing. As you can see, we have created the term for convenience but it is not an absolute and although you could define cold as whatever you like and likewise  bad, wrong, or ugly, the fact remains it is arbitrary and doesn't exist in reality. 

As i have posted 10 posts above this one ... "However useful opposites seem to be in organizing ourselves or simplifying our life, they simply do not exist except as arbitrary points on a continuum  in our mind."  To realize such and truly understand this goes a long way toward peace and less strife in ones life.

[thormas]

18 hours ago, PaulS said:

Whatever you need to tell yourself, Thormas.

Thank you I feel so much better with your approval.

[thormas]

13 minutes ago, JosephM said:

Your definition agrees with (meteorology) cold fronts which is a  temperature that is colder (has less heat) than the air it is displacing. The word as used for cold in cold front is an arbitrary temperature as it is only in relation to the existing temperature it is replacing. As you can see, we have created the term for convenience but it is not an absolute and although you could define cold as whatever you like and likewise  bad, wrong, or ugly, the fact remains it is arbitrary and doesn't exist in reality. 

As i have posted 10 posts above this one ... "However useful opposites seem to be in organizing ourselves or simplifying our life, they simply do not exist except as arbitrary points on a continuum  in our mind."  To realize such and truly understand this goes a long way toward peace and less strife in ones life.

As you noted it works in meteorology and it is convenient, evidenced by the weather report being so 'essential' to the morning end evening commutes of so many. 

Just one serious clarification: the word cold is used to speak of a change in an existing temperature (less heat for example as opposed to more heat) and the word cold is arbitrary and it states a 'temperature' that is arbitrary but the human being still 'experiences' a real difference - otherwise there would be no need to come up with an arbitrary term. So, am I following you in that there is a reality experience but simply what we call it is arbitrary? 

If that is so, isn't that what we do fro everything we experience: we name it, we measure it, we have a way to characterize it ........so that we can know it (so to speak) and make the world our home, make all convenient? 

What I don't get is your statement on opposites. So opposites are useful and it is we who name the world in this way. And cold is a convenient term, but doesn't it still give a name to what is experienced: a difference along the continuum wherein one has to strip off clothes or bundle up? How does this 'recognition' create less strife (specifically col/hot) one still has to deal with the experienced reality and dealing it the wrong way can result in death. 

[JosephM]

1 hour ago, thormas said:

(snip)

What I don't get is your statement on opposites. So opposites are useful and it is we who name the world in this way. And cold is a convenient term, but doesn't it still give a name to what is experienced: a difference along the continuum wherein one has to strip off clothes or bundle up? How does this 'recognition' create less strife (specifically col/hot) one still has to deal with the experienced reality and dealing it the wrong way can result in death. 

No, it is different for different people. Your amount of heat to strip off clothes is not the same as mine. It is subjective. Husbands and wives fight everyday over the supposedly useful uses of the word cold and hot in their homes that in essence are arbitrary. Friendships are lost daily, countries are divided and wars are fought over the arbitrary use of the words good and bad, right and wrong. If one can't understand that one chooses arbitrary points on a continuum that we deem as opposites when in fact they are not, then neither will one understand that right and wrong , good and bad, or in the case of this thread good and sin, are also merely arbitrary concepts and if not understood as such leads to anxiety, strife and a less peaceful existence.

[romansh]

17 hours ago, PaulS said:

that wasn't what you were being asked about

The interesting thing Paul, is that thormas suggests he can do otherwise … but we keep seeing the same ol' patterns behavior from thormas.

[thormas]

1 hour ago, JosephM said:

No, it is different for different people. Your amount of heat to strip off clothes is not the same as mine. It is subjective. Husbands and wives fight everyday over the supposedly useful uses of the word cold and hot in their homes that in essence are arbitrary. Friendships are lost daily, countries are divided and wars are fought over the arbitrary use of the words good and bad, right and wrong. If one can't understand that one chooses arbitrary points on a continuum that we deem as opposites when in fact they are not, then neither will one understand that right and wrong , good and bad, or in the case of this thread good and sin, are also merely arbitrary concepts and if not understood as such leads to anxiety, strife and a less peaceful existence.

Granted there is some (sometimes even a considerable amount) difference among people and thus the reaction is subjective. However those people are reacting to 'something outside of themselves.' Of course it is 'their' reaction and subjective judgment as to 'what's cold" but there was first a 'change in temperature.' As an example, here in NC it was in the 20s the last few mornings but a few days earlier it was 70 degrees and to greater or lesser degrees, everybody noticed, reacted, commented and adjusted their clothing. I agree that some put on more, actually much more, than others but, whatever the amount of clothing, that was a reaction to a real change. 

I grant you the point about friendship, countries and wars but sometimes it is more than the arbitrary use of words that is the cause: when Hitler invaded European countries was it just an arbitrary decision to call the death and destruction that was part of those invasions, bad, wrong or 'an act of war?' Or was it 'in reality' bad, wrong and immoral? And then we have the holocaust: was there no right or wrong, good or bad? 

And again we have Jesus (who I have mentioned before but no response): he confronted the Pharisees and everyday Jews when he saw people suffering, harmed or ostracized as a result of their (i.e. the Pharisees and the crowd around the adulteress) actions. And seemingly because of his words others had moment of enlightenment and there was forgiveness, love and peace. So although there was some subjectivity (I suspect the Pharisees and the others thought they were right), it seems that Jesus' perspective was 'onto something more' which indeed brought forgiveness and peace. 

I get that our words are arbitrary in that is how we have named the world (reality) but it does seem that sometimes those arbitrary words and concepts actually do justice to what is reality. It seems that there is a way or truth to/of reality and some, in speaking to it, in declaring it, bring peace and love. Can there be peace, love and forgiveness if one does not know what those concepts are and does not one who uses them also have some inkling that they are in 'opposition' to that which is not peace, love and forgiveness? 

Thanks.

[JosephM]

53 minutes ago, thormas said:

(snip)

I grant you the point about friendship, countries and wars but sometimes it is more than the arbitrary use of words that is the cause: when Hitler invaded European countries was it just an arbitrary decision to call the death and destruction that was part of those invasions, bad, wrong or 'an act of war?' Or was it 'in reality' bad, wrong and immoral? And then we have the holocaust: was there no right or wrong, good or bad? 

(snip)

I get that our words are arbitrary in that is how we have named the world (reality) but it does seem that sometimes those arbitrary words and concepts actually do justice to what is reality.

(snip)

There is nothing else i know to say to help you perceive what i see. There indeed was the holocaust yet there was no right or wrong, good or bad moral or immoral ...... there was only the holocaust and your privilege to call it whatever  is convenient for you to call it.. In reality, it is what it is. There is no need for me to use opposites that exist only in concepts the mind creates as if it knows what it really is. Not using such words doesn't forbid me from taking wise action from a peaceful state.

How do words do justice? (Rhetorical -no response required) What do opposites do to reality except to distort it and divide people?  (Rhetorical -no response required)

Merry Christmas and best wishes for the coming year to you and yours,

Joseph

[thormas]

2 hours ago, JosephM said:

There is nothing else i know to say to help you perceive what i see. There indeed was the holocaust yet there was no right or wrong, good or bad moral or immoral ...... there was only the holocaust and your privilege to call it whatever  is convenient for you to call it.. In reality, it is what it is. There is no need for me to use opposites that exist only in concepts the mind creates as if it knows what it really is. Not using such words doesn't forbid me from taking wise action from a peaceful state.

How do words do justice? (Rhetorical -no response required) What do opposites do to reality except to distort it and divide people?  (Rhetorical -no response required)

Merry Christmas and best wishes for the coming year to you and yours,

Joseph

Well Joseph, I'm disappointed - I was very interested. And I'm surprised that there is nothing else you can say to enable others to see. Whether they agree or not is ultimately their decision but it seems valuable enough to present. My most important (re)learning was with a philosophy professor in college who presented his wisdom in some of the most ingenious ways - just presented it and gave us avenues into it - and, therefore, the possibility that some would catch it and run with it, wherever it might take them.

How do words do justice? They never do fully: how can "I love" ever capture the fullness of the reality of how one 'is' towards their child? Yet, it is what we finite human being have and it does just fine as does a rose or a small token given in the name of that love. Words are revelatory and give us an opening into the mystery of another being and of reality itself. The 'proof:' simply bear witness to others who withhold the word, who withhold love, and watch another wither and life leave their eyes. Or simply, say the word - with all you are behind it - and watch it create life. 

As for 'opposites:' love and no love. Therein is all the difference in life and it is so important that it is worth some division (hopefully a short one) to speak the 'truth' of life - as did Jesus (just one example). And one such truth lived by millions upon millions was to state that Hitler was wrong and then to act on it (perhaps this is what you mean by wise action from a peaceful state?). 

Anyway, the quest continues and thanks.

 

Happy Christmas to you also, Joseph (my professor is also named Joseph).

Edited December 21, 2019 by thormas

[thormas]

5 hours ago, romansh said:

The interesting thing Paul, is that thormas suggests he can do otherwise … but we keep seeing the same ol' patterns behavior from thormas.

Rom, you don't have to send messages to Paul about me. That's just a bit strange.......

 

Edited December 21, 2019 by thormas

[romansh]

21 minutes ago, thormas said:

Rom, feel free to speak directly to Paul, you don't have to send messages to Paul addressed to me. That's just a bit strange.......

It was addressed to Paul?

[thormas]

8 minutes ago, romansh said:

 

I made it all better.

It is still a bit strange, like school kid gossip :+} 

[PaulS]

11 hours ago, thormas said:

Well Joseph, I'm disappointed - I was very interested. And I'm surprised that there is nothing else you can say to enable others to see. 

I think Joseph has said much to enable others to see, it's just that not all others can see. 

I think I can see quite clearly what Joseph is saying - opposites don't exist.  They are a figment of your imagination.  Arbitrary terminology does nothing to establish opposites.  Even your 'love or no love' is not a case of opposites but merely just points where one lands on any 'love' continuum.  In fact, you are yet to establish a case for anything that could actually be substantiated as opposites.

Your mind is thinking in a very human, black and white concept mode (again, black and whites are not opposites but it is an arbitrary phrase we humans use), which is possibly why it doesn't work for you (currently) that there are no opposites.  Such thinking may have helped us in a fear or flight situation (even then they are not true opposites but one can see where the very human notion of opposites possibly came from in our evolution and development), but to me it seems totally inadequate when trying to understand how one or another views actions.  Just the two phrases above I used demonstrate to me how our human language is loaded with opposites, but when you stop and think about them, they are not actually opposites at all.  

In the most simplistic way we do think opposites exist, but when we scratch deeper and test this notion, I can see what Joseph is saying and it makes perfect sense to me.  Opposites are simply an opinion, so depending on what the opinion is determines where one decides what is opposite.  Perhaps recognizing that it is just opinion means one can recognize that there is no opposite.

At least that's how I see what Joseph is saying.

[PaulS]

11 hours ago, romansh said:

The interesting thing Paul, is that thormas suggests he can do otherwise … but we keep seeing the same ol' patterns behavior from thormas.

Don't give up hope, Rom!