zerinus wrote:If he believes that what he has posted is NOT intellectually dishonest, and you think that it IS, the burden is on you to shown him WHY IT IS, not on him to show you WHY IT IS NOT. If you think that what he has posted is intellectually dishonest, you first explain to him why you think it is, and then he will be able to counter it by explaining to you why it isn't. That is the way it works, not the other way.[/color]
Yup.
Regards, MG
Had you bothered to read the exchanges, you'd know that zerinus' comments above were a lecture to me about making a claim that I haven't made.
Nice going.
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
mentalgymnast wrote: evading my request to use my words within the post in question
[bolding added by me]
Already done. See copy of my post below. Also,
Lemmie, for the sixth time, wrote:If you have a problem with a concept in my post, then feel free to write a post addressing that concept.
The post in question:
Lemmie wrote:I think mentalgymnast doesn't quite understand that people are referring to his intellectual dishonesty based on how he approaches a debate--as usual he is presenting himself as a martyr for his religious beliefs but his dishonesty and disingenuousness are entirely separate from that.
For example, he started this 25 page thread with this...
mentalgymnast wrote:I go with Elder Callister, and here's why. It's actually kind of simple. I've made a choice to believe in a creator/God. Operating under this premise/assumption when I'm listening to Elder Callister's recap of the five humanistic arguments that have sort of worn thin in regards to the coming forth of the Book of Mormon, I am OPEN to seeing God's hand in it...
It's really that simple...isn't it?
I haven't seen any conclusive evidence that would demonstrate that Joseph and/or others whipped up this book.
But in the middle of the thread, when asked to explain, after a lot of deflecting, he posts this...
mentalgymnast wrote:Many of us believe that the Book of Mormon translation was not just ancient or just modern, but that it is a mix of both. That Joseph's world is in in the ancient and the ancient is in his. The Book of Mormon is a composite of both the ancient and the modern and whatever comes in between. Including possible modifications in order to fit the actual message and/or doctrines that are being taught.
Even though Chap pointed out that his allusions to Ostler's theory were not in agreement with his initial position, he never did actually say anything about it, other than it's been a long time since he read it and he doesn't really remember! He did ask others, repeatedly, to read him and explain the theory to him.
And now, he is back to this:
mentalgymnast wrote: I believe the Book of Mormon to be the result of Divine Intervention in the affairs of men and that it is an artifact from an ancient world in which God the Father and His Son Jesus Christ spoke with and directed/guided the affairs and doings of a 'branch of Israel' through prophets.
Stuff like this is where the conclusion of intellectual dishonesty and disingenuousness comes from.
Jersey Girl wrote:Do you need a teacher? Let's start with reading comprehension.
Nowhere in my exchanges with MG have I accused him of being intellectually dishonest. That is to say, I have made no claim whatsoever.
<snip>
Somebody has accused him of being "intellectually dishonest". He maintains that he is not. Your insistence that he proves to you that he is not is an utterly stupid way of going about it.
Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:So, just to jump on SteelHead's point, Zerinus. You would agree if someone is asserting something the burden of proof is on them?
- Doc
More stupid questions, on top of more stupid questions.
When you accuse somebody of something, the burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused.
It looks like stupidity and idiocy knows no bounds round here.
So. You know. Like when someone is asserting that something is a certain way the burden of proof lies with them? You know. Like, if the government is asserting you stole something the burden of proof lies with the government, right? How is this idiocy and why are you so defensive?
- Doc
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.
Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
Jersey Girl wrote:Do you need a teacher? Let's start with reading comprehension.
Nowhere in my exchanges with MG have I accused him of being intellectually dishonest. That is to say, I have made no claim whatsoever.
<snip>
Somebody has accused him of being "intellectually dishonest". He maintains that he is not. Your insistence that he proves to you that he is not is an utterly stupid way of going about it.
Nowhere in my posts to him have I asked him to prove that he is not intellectually dishonest.
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
mentalgymnast wrote:...listening to KBYU radio in my truck ...
There are so many more interesting things you could choose to do in a truck. And you chose this?
Last edited by Guest on Mon Apr 17, 2017 3:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Oh for shame, how the mortals put the blame on us gods, for they say evils come from us, but it is they, rather, who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given... Zeus (1178 BC)