You guys are still at it! (why am I not surprised?)

[Marcus]

As a heart attack.

You have to read Shulem's posts as a whole. While just breathing. Running off fiddling while in a boxing ring is not easier than watching someone dot i's and cross t's while ignoring their meaning but it's definitely more meaningful. Also look up obtuse.

Exactly.

Don't understand what you are saying. I'm not good at detecting humour, if that makes me obtuse then sure.

Sounds like you do understand.

[IWMP]

My dad thought he was god. He literally would walk around saying, 'I am". He certainly wasn't normal. He honestly believed himself to be special.

Shulem is not like your dad.

I know.

[IWMP]

Don't understand what you are saying. I'm not good at detecting humour, if that makes me obtuse then sure.

Sounds like you do understand.

Well, I wasn't sure, but thanks for the clarification

Quick question: Are you just calling me obtuse, or everyone who wouldn't understand the humour in this conversation?

[Marcus]

Sounds like you do understand.

Well, I wasn't sure, but thanks for the clarification

Quick question: Are you just calling me obtuse, or everyone who wouldn't understand the humour in this conversation?

I'm curious why you chose those two options, and then why you tried to limit your question to an either A or B answer?

You don't have to answer that. I'm just pointing out that framing questions that way seems to have an underlying motive other than gaining knowledge about another person's thought processes.

[IWMP]

Well, I wasn't sure, but thanks for the clarification

Quick question: Are you just calling me obtuse, or everyone who wouldn't understand the humour in this conversation?

I'm curious why you chose those two options, and then why you tried to limit your question to an either A or B answer?

You don't have to answer that. I'm just pointing out that framing questions that way seems to have an underlying motive other than gaining knowledge about another person's thought processes.

What's the other options?

Returning the jist of what I removed. This is copied elsewhere.

I talked about how I struggle to detect humour, I also struggle with sarcasm and sometimes I think people are joking when they are serious. I think I may have wrote that I see all these scenarios but struggle to choose which is the right answer because they all look the same.

[Marcus]

It's an extremely common issue for virtually everyone online, and has nothing to do with intelligence or brightness. Read Poe's Law at rationalwiki, the history of the development of the term is quite interesting.

A couple of excerpts:

Poe's Law states:[1]

“”Without a clear indication of the author's intent, it is difficult or impossible to tell the difference between an expression of sincere extremism and a parody of extremism"

...However, the usage of the law has grown, and now the term "Poe" is applied to almost any parody on the internet. Essentially, Poe's Law has developed to include three similar but distinct concepts:

The original idea that at least one person will mistake parodic postings for sincere beliefs.
That nobody will be able to distinguish many instances of parodic posts from the real thing.
That anyone not already in the grip of fundamentalist ideas will (perhaps due to not being sufficiently insane for fundamentalist ideas to "make sense" to them) mistake sincere expressions of fundamentalism for parody.[note 2][note 3]...

[MG 2.0]

OK. I believe in a Heavenly Father and that I am created in His image.

Do you believe Shulem and Marcus are also created in your Heavenly Father's image?

Yep!

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

MG says hello with a couple of trite comments and gets 20 pages of replies. Boredom is the best explanation I can think of. It is a bit too bad; perhaps things will pick up again after a pause.

I hope you find it as interesting as I do, haha.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

Hey MG

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muP4cmG92YI

For those of you who are Jonathan Rauch fans.

To be fair, I don't know anything about Jonathan Rauch, and I only watched a few minutes of the hour plus video.

Having said that, the title of the video, "Can Mormonism Save American Democracy?" strikes me as very odd.

If you're willing (I assume you watched the full video and are familiar with Jonathan), what is he suggesting by the title?

Simply put. The church is solid enough in its position and potential influence for good that it can play an integral part as the nation slips towards moral decay, materialism, tribalism without compromise, lack of form footing with a higher purpose, etc., etc.

In other words, a light on the hill. That was the gist I got out of it. But that's the opinion of a "troll".

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

MG says hello with a couple of trite comments and gets 20 pages of replies. Boredom is the best explanation I can think of. It is a bit too bad; perhaps things will pick up again after a pause.

He plays everyone like a fiddle and they don't see it.

C'mon.

Regards,
MG