zedvictor4

I don't know much about George Floyd....Was he a perpetual saint?....Because he was allegedly killed by a "White Cop".

Was the light skinned policeman a perpetual sinner because he allegedly  killed a dark skinned guy?

Given that racism is far from exclusive to one particular skin tone,  wasn't the ensuing anti social behaviour and violence,  just as racially motivated and socially abhorrent as the catalyst itself.

So what or who specifically, was the mob violence and anger really aimed at? 

Yep. 

But I would disagree with your analogies.

I would suggest that hard wired, subconscious, is instinctive and therefore genetic.

Whereas nurture is  a consciously programmed operating system, which becomes difficult but not impossible to modify as we get older.

Thanks for the compliment.

You see, we do agree about some things.

And which was the first best point I ever made?

The same principle could and should, therefore  be applied to every little thing that we disagree about. 

So the difference between  a left wing atheist, meat eating, homosexual, cycling, cat loving, dog hating, smart suited, bearded, spectacle wearer....And a right wing, Muslim, vegan, heterosexual, jogging, dog loving, cat hating, casually dressed,  clean shaven, contact-lens wearer....Is all down to genetics...Though I suppose that this would also take into account a tolerance or intolerance gene....It would take along time to breed out all our genetic idiosyncrasies....And how do we agree upon what is and isn't pure?....Perhaps it would be prudent to just eradicate the intolerance gene.

Too right.

They will yell you that it's all a part of the big test to see if you are worthy or not.

Though I would suggest that the giant-ass book was probably compiled by people at a later date.

I think that god only possessed tablet of stone technology at the time... It was obviously a dab hand with a hammer and chisel.

I'll certainly experience the Circus....All those clowns and acrobats.

Are you up late or up early?

I doubt that anyone ever gets it.

We all like to think that we get it....Such is conditioning.

If everyone remains mature and civil then maturity and civility will abound.

Yep.

My ideas of a god principle are along these lines.

So one cannot rightly refer to the concept of deism as a "hoax".  

What I would suggest is that Christianity is simply a mythology woven into the god principle.

it's the maintenance of the myth that still hoaxes. 

Also, it occurs to me that by definitively stating that God is male, you are in fact also implying that a god does exist.

If it did exist and it was as fantastic as people say it is, then it wouldn't try to lift something that was too heavy. It would just create a lifting device. Only foolish people try to lift things that are too heavy?.....Oooooh my back!

You are currently fixated with "Landover".

So what is Landover?

Are you referring to the Magic Kingdom (Terry Brooks), or perhaps the Town in Maryland.....These are the two options that my quick internet search comes up with.

That's me that is....Like I said....Peas in a pod.

We are physiologically omnivorous, so the consumption of meat protein within a varied diet was obviously how our digestive system developed.... Back in the day you couldn't just pop down to the supermarket and pick up a pack of synthesised veggie protein....Back in the day you ate what was available, and if you didn't, you didn't survive for long (not that you survived for long anyway). 

The modern moral argument is simply the modern moral argument...Simply because some people  can comfortably afford to be modernly moralistic.

He was elected because the American people voted for him...Though that's something of a presumption, as U.S. electoral systems are not particularly straightforward.

I'm not sure that the National result ever reflects the popular vote in U.S. Presidential elections. 

Though as a Brit, I wouldn't dream of suggesting that U.S. presidential elections were open to corruption.

The N.Y.P.D. would still be the N.Y.P.D. …..You cannot abolish law enforcement...Perhaps the N.Y.P.D. just requires a different ethos and modus operandi. (Change)

Just tit for tat, friendly jibes... Mr Ethan gives as good as he gets.

Exactly.

Q. How do you change the human world.

A. It slowly changes itself. (Evolution)

There has been an appreciable change in both British and U.S. societies in the past 60 years since I was born....That didn't happen overnight just because a light skinned cop killed a dark skinned guy and people violently protested...Though these sort of events are nonetheless all part of the slow process of change.

Ha Ha.

You were just describing yourself....

Though the content may be different.... the condition is exactly the same.

Good one.

We're obviously peas in a pod you and I....Both loads of fun.

Just talk your own rhetoric through in your head (#5)….Can you not see the obvious flaw in your reasoning (bias)….The problem is always the other sort.

This is not a criticism...I'm just pointing out how the reality of the human condition and human conditioning (in relation to perceivable difference), is clearly emphasised in your post.

If we don't teach our kids that we are all from Planet Earth and therefore all basically the same, then you will never end up with an adult population that is integrated...lighter skin tone or darker skin tone, makes no difference to the shared problem.

If you teach kids nonsense then they will grow up believing in nonsense.

Back to basics violence in the streets is the level playing field.

It's ridiculous to expect that a society is going to be something that you don't condition it to become.

Yep....Sounds like me.

Exactly what I was thinking about you...But don't be mad...Some people are reality challenged.

Works both ways....that's the reality.

True.

Sociologically, crime is it's own problem, irrespective of skin tone.

And as I stated.... Racism is not exclusive.....Though some people prefer to think that it is.

It might require more than one syllable.

As if an omniscient creator would care about all that human B.S.

Mantra for today.....We've created many gods in our minds, but none as yet in reality.

Have a go at stereotyping a Brit then.

Hear Hear.

Whether or not lives matter is a philosophical question, hijacked by a mob as an excuse for violence and rioting in the name of counter-racism.

As you rightly point out...Lives only matter when it suits.

And inherent racism is far from exclusive.

Ha Ha.

We all have our mantra's.

Exactly.

There are estimated to be 2.3 billion Tom, Dick and Harry's worldwide, and given the nature of my upbringing, that's probably me included.

How many other  involuntarily labelled Christians, threw away their bibles long ago, just as I did?

So what actually is a true Christian?

Perhaps only the devout one's that do actually study and read the bible.

I admire your strict one syllable code.

As I suggested, all people hear voices in their head all the time....Basically people talking to themselves, making internal assessments of stored data....God data for instance.

I would further suggest that most people do not even consider this normal function at all.

It's certainly not an activity exclusive to Christians.

Intuition simply defines our ability to retrieve and utilise stored data quickly.....Thinking that we don't think about it is overthink if you think about it. Because thinking is thinking and not thinking isn't.

Implying intuition,  simply underestimates the thinking (data management) capabilities of the human brain.

When you say "known quantum law", what do you mean specifically?

I would suggest that the statement is probably a fact rather than a cliché.

Of course it might depend upon how you choose to define a Christian.

Are you referring to every Tom, Dick or Harriet that has been subjected to the water splashing ritual?...Or just to all the devoutish ones that do read their bible from time to time..

So do you have every page of your bible recorded to memory?...Because unless you have,  then what was the actual purpose of reading it...Other than  as a transitory entertainment experience.

Without looking, what does it say on page 87?

How so Mr one syllable?

I would suggest, only wrong because you have been conditioned to deny it's correctness.

Well.

I think that I understand what you mean by "fuck off".

We perhaps use the phrase somewhat differently, and more abusively here in the U.K.

I believe that I was agreeing with your approach to situations that might be confrontational.

Though if I misunderstood, then we both might as well, just "fuck off".

The inherent hierarchy and disparity of any society is it's fundamental problem irrespective of ethnicity and skin tone. Especially if we teach expectation.

Occasionally, laws and common sense cease to be relevant....Until such times as laws and common sense become relevant again.

Though human social conflicts are now  exacerbated by the immediacy of social media.

Yep.

The ambiguity of definition is sometimes misleading.

Perhaps noise would be better, though even this is not clear cut, as technically certain noise is not detectable by the human auditory system.

Good vibrations as someone once sang.

Ignorance is bliss.

Exactly.

If it is possible that a god does exist, then it is possible that a god does exist.

If it is possible that a god doesn't exist, then it is possible that a god doesn't exist.

With a little imagination anything is possible.

Hey Mr Ascerbic.

You always dodge the biggest question of all....Can you actually prove that a god exists?

And in fairness, that conditioned mental block compels you to dodge.

I do understand.

P.S.

I hope that you were aware of protestations I made against your ban...… And Regards to Mrs Ethan.

Knowledge and information and the accessibility and transfer thereof, and the perceptible difference of skin tone and appearance.

One step into the future, but one step back into the cave.

Not to be confused with a life.....What exactly is life?...Is there even a conceptual answer?...Let alone evidence on which to base an inference.

Nonetheless:

Occam bases his reasoning on a pre-existing assumption. That is to say that the outcome has  already been decided irrespective of evidence.

Occam's razor  just becomes a self-contained justification of itself.

Welcome back to Mr Ascerbic.

Perhaps you made the logical error by believing in a god.

Though, what exactly is a logical error?....One would assume that the very nature of an error would render it illogical....And similarly that something that is logical can not actually be erroneous.

Decisions, decisions.

I would suggest that  we are all constrained by the limits, and more so the content of our conditioned databases.  So had we been taught differently, we probably would have made different decisions......Hence the zealot and the sceptic develop not by choice or decision, but by conditioning.

What is a feeling?

It's an internal physiological response to an internally generated idea.

I can run with the notion of a god principle which is suggestive of a universal purpose.

But all those biblical stories and characters are just so irrelevant to an ultimate purpose or intelligence, especially in the context of our modern technological lives.

Technological evolution is exceeding human evolution, so if answers are to be found, they are more than likely going to to be found in a computer data base somewhere, rather than upon tablets of stone.