Originally posted by Patrick: Dennis, I don't appreciate what you're implying.
quote
Originally posted by Dennis LaGrua:
A persons belief system governs their behavior.
quote
Originally posted by Patrick: I believe in my ability to be a decent human being without the need of an artificial support system.
quote
Originally posted by Dennis LaGrua:
I am not here to proselytize...
quote
Originally posted by Patrick: It appears you are. If you wish to expound your personal views on religion, use the O/T forum.
Seriously, Patrick? Dennis said what he meant. Correctly or incorrectly, you inferred religion, ergo, your comment was misplaced, especially in that it derailed the thread. In regards to your phrase in boldface above, aren't you at best the pot calling the kettle black? Dennis made a statement of fact, with which you seem to agree (minus your inferred religious aspect), and then--how would you term your reaction? Attacking his beliefs, as you choose to see them? Are you implying that your method is superior, by using the condescending verbiage?
”Faith is confidence or trust in a person or thing or a belief not based on proof. It may also refer to a particular system of religious belief.”
I can therefore believe something is right or wrong, without being associated with a religion. I can have faith in the good will of my fellow man. I can have faith that someone won't attempt to force their views on me, any more than they want me to force my views on them.
There is nothing to be gained by taking every opportunity to be offended by something someone else says that doesn't jive with your world view. And yes, this isn't the first thread.
In this case, faith could well be defined as sending your harness and some money to someone on the internet whom you've never met with the hope that they'll return a completed, quality swap harness in a reasonable time.
The last line quoted above applies to you, also.
[This message has been edited by tshark (edited 09-13-2015).]
Originally posted by tshark: In this case, faith could well be defined as sending your harness and some money to someone on the internet whom you've never met with the hope that they'll return a completed, quality swap harness in a reasonable time.
Not really. The buyer's faith in the seller doesn't govern whether the seller will be a good person and uphold their word or not.
Faith (of any kind) doesn't make people good or bad. Actions do.
Originally posted by dobey: Not really. The buyer's faith in the seller doesn't govern whether the seller will be a good person and uphold their word or not.
Again, ”Faith is confidence or trust in a person or thing or a belief not based on proof. It may also refer to a particular system of religious belief.” It doesn't get any plainer than that. So, yes, really. Discounting faith doesn't change the meaning of the word. When you clicked the submit button on your comment, you were exercising faith. Do you have a contribution to this thread?
Originally posted by tshark: Again, ”Faith is confidence or trust in a person or thing or a belief not based on proof. It may also refer to a particular system of religious belief.” It doesn't get any plainer than that. So, yes, really. Discounting faith doesn't change the meaning of the word. When you clicked the submit button on your comment, you were exercising faith. Do you have a contribution to this thread?
No, when I clicked the submit button, I was not exercising faith. What I do is based on proof.
The OP's original submission of his harness and money to phonedawgz for completing the harness conversion was also not necessarily based on faith. It was more than likely based on evidence (previous customers having gotten their harnesses completed by phonedawgz). In either case, neither of those dictates specifically whether phonedawgz will be an upstanding person. The only thing governing whether phonedawgz will be an upstanding person, and follow through on his commitments, is phonedawgz himself. Faith, no matter how you are attempting to define it in this thread, has nothing to do with it.
Again, buyer's faith that the seller will be a good person and deliver on their promises, does not dictate that seller will, in fact, be a good person and deliver on said promises. If it did, there wouldn't be so many recent threads about these vendors turning into liars and thieves, who take money and goods, don't deliver as promised, and who fail to communicate with the buyer when they can't meet their own promises.
Well this got wierd. Anyways Ill post some pics of my car later. I cant upload them from my phone for some reason. Im really excited about gettimg my harness amd computer and getting my car back and more awesome than ever. Next will be the pisa euro interior.
Correctly or incorrectly, you inferred religion, ergo, your comment was misplaced, especially in that it derailed the thread.
This thread was already derailed as soon as Dennis got on his pulpit and started to go on about "faith". If you weren't a relative newcomer here, you'd know that Dennis is a bible-thumper from way back.
I don't appreciate his implication that religious people Christians (might as well be up front about it) somehow have superior moral guidance than the rest of us. That's just so much hogwash. We don't need this distraction in the tech forums.
Ryan, sorry for the blip of weirdness in your thread.
Since you are bull&h!ting his faith and you have no idea if it was his parents or not I am double BSing you. Maybe he was an orphan or his parents were not worth a grain of salt. So keep your religion bashing to yourself, he even mentioned an alternate belief.
quote
Originally posted by dobey:
You don't need faith to be a good person, or to be taught honesty or compassion. Faith isn't what disciplined you as a child. Your parents/guardians provided that discipline, as did their parents/guardians to them.
Originally posted by dobey: No, when I clicked the submit button, I was not exercising faith. What I do is based on proof.
The OP's original submission of his harness and money to phonedawgz for completing the harness conversion was also not necessarily based on faith. It was more than likely based on evidence (previous customers having gotten their harnesses completed by phonedawgz). In either case, neither of those dictates specifically whether phonedawgz will be an upstanding person. The only thing governing whether phonedawgz will be an upstanding person, and follow through on his commitments, is phonedawgz himself. Faith, no matter how you are attempting to define it in this thread, has nothing to do with it.
Again, buyer's faith that the seller will be a good person and deliver on their promises, does not dictate that seller will, in fact, be a good person and deliver on said promises. If it did, there wouldn't be so many recent threads about these vendors turning into liars and thieves, who take money and goods, don't deliver as promised, and who fail to communicate with the buyer when they can't meet their own promises.
Dobey, you seem to habe a fair understanding of cars, and I respect that knowledge, but your post on faith contraditcs itself. I used the dictionary definition of faith. No matter how exhaustive your denial, the definition remains the same. If you read the definitiin of faith, NOWHERE does it say anything about dictating results.
By your reasoning, the fact that phonedawgz completed harnesses for other people is evidence (your proof) that a completed harness will be delivered to the OP. Of course, we know that that didn't happen, thus your whole argument falls apart.
As for the submit button, unless you have the server-side code, you have no proof, prior to hitting the button. When I click the submit button, sometimes I get an error about the script. Another fail in your argument.
I find it humorous that you use the textbook definition of faith, then claim it's not faith. So, your parents engender their faith, principles, and habits in you, OK. Got it. Please, if you're going to post about this, do your due research to become as knowledgeable about this as you are about about cars--which is what this thread was about.
[This message has been edited by tshark (edited 09-14-2015).]
Originally posted by Patrick: If you weren't a relative newcomer here, you'd know that Dennis is a bible-thumper from way back.
I take is that you have a differing view from just as far back? Neither view is right--or wrong; better or worse. Your view works for you, his for him. You may be over-sensitive, but I don't see that he was out of line in this case. Seriously, his view is part of what makes him Dennis. Unless you harbor animosity toward him, if he suddenly had an opposing viewpoint, wouldn't you wonder if his account had been hacked, and if he was OK?
quote
Originally posted by Patrick: I don't appreciate his implication that religious people Christians (might as well be up front about it) somehow have superior moral guidance than the rest of us. That's just so much hogwash. We don't need this distraction in the tech forums.
Dennis made a brief comment to his belief; you took the superior attitude of trying to correct him. Personally, I would've just overlooked that phrase you highlighted. So, here is the distraction in the tech forum.
[This message has been edited by tshark (edited 09-14-2015).]
Originally posted by LornesGT: Since you are bull&h!ting his faith and you have no idea if it was his parents or not I am double BSing you. Maybe he was an orphan or his parents were not worth a grain of salt. So keep your religion bashing to yourself, he even mentioned an alternate belief.
If he was an orphan, then he got it from his guardians, whether they were nuns or foster parents. So keep your religion to yourself. Faith does not make people good. Actions are what make people good or bad.
Originally posted by tshark: Dobey, you seem to habe a fair understanding of cars, and I respect that knowledge, but your post on faith contraditcs itself. I used the dictionary definition of faith. No matter how exhaustive your denial, the definition remains the same. If you read the definitiin of faith, NOWHERE does it say anything about dictating results.
By your reasoning, the fact that phonedawgz completed harnesses for other people is evidence (your proof) that a completed harness will be delivered to the OP. Of course, we know that that didn't happen, thus your whole argument falls apart.
As for the submit button, unless you have the server-side code, you have no proof, prior to hitting the button. When I click the submit button, sometimes I get an error about the script. Another fail in your argument.
I find it humorous that you use the textbook definition of faith, then claim it's not faith. So, your parents engender their faith, principles, and habits in you, OK. Got it. Please, if you're going to post about this, do your due research to become as knowledgeable about this as you are about about cars--which is what this thread was about.
You clearly are either not actually reading and comprehending what I said, or are just being belligerent simply because I said that faith has nothing to do with anything in this thread. Go back and read Dennis's post again. He clearly made the statement that a faith and belief system is required to make you a good person, and claims that if you are an atheist, then you have absolutely no morals, and anything goes.
That, my friend, is total bullshit. The definition of faith is irrelevant, because faith is irrelevant to whether someone is a good person or not. I never said that faith was not faith. Dennis was clearly talking about religious faith, not simple trust in another human being. Otherwise, he would have simply said trust, not faith, and would have not gone on to demonstrably claim that the lack of faith leads one to do bad things. If the seller's faith made them a good person, then this thread, nor any of the ones like it, would even need to exist, because those sellers would always deliver on their promises.
As for the submit button, it is not faith that guides me to trust that my post will be submitted. It is evidence from experience and understanding. I know what errors may occur, and I know how to deal with them when they do. There is nothing about the submit button that requires me to have some sort of religious belief system, to trust that my post will be submitted, as you seem to be implying with your defense of Dennis's comments.
Originally posted by dobey: You clearly are either not actually reading and comprehending what I said, or are just being belligerent simply because I said that faith has nothing to do with anything in this thread. Go back and read Dennis's post again. He clearly made the statement that a faith and belief system is required to make you a good person, and claims that if you are an atheist, then you have absolutely no morals, and anything goes.
That, my friend, is total bullshit. The definition of faith is irrelevant, because faith is irrelevant to whether someone is a good person or not. I never said that faith was not faith. Dennis was clearly talking about religious faith, not simple trust in another human being. Otherwise, he would have simply said trust, not faith, and would have not gone on to demonstrably claim that the lack of faith leads one to do bad things. If the seller's faith made them a good person, then this thread, nor any of the ones like it, would even need to exist, because those sellers would always deliver on their promises.
As for the submit button, it is not faith that guides me to trust that my post will be submitted. It is evidence from experience and understanding. I know what errors may occur, and I know how to deal with them when they do. There is nothing about the submit button that requires me to have some sort of religious belief system, to trust that my post will be submitted, as you seem to be implying with your defense of Dennis's comments.
I'll quote Dennis here, because you are the one who needs to read:
quote
Originally posted by Dennis L.: You clearly are either not actually reading and A persons belief system governs their behavior. In simple terms if you do not believe in anything, then anything goes. I am not here to proselytize, but the guiding light in my life has been my faith. It has taught me honesty, generosity, compassion, love of neighbor and led me towards righteousness. If you have an alternate belief system that leads you to do good things then all the better.
Dennis CLEARLY stated that his faith blah, blah, blah, and that if you have an alternate belief system that works for you, then all the better. To paraphrase you, your lack of reading comprehension does not support your comments.
Dennis also clearly stated that a ”person's system” (aka NOT FAITH) governes their behavior. Even you probably believe in some sort of right or wrong, and that governs your behavior. It would appear that you're afraid of the word ”faith”. I wonder why. Faith is not religion.
I must've missed where Dennis used the word ”athiest”. Please find me that quote. You aren't foaming at the mouth, are you? We're talking about harnesses and vendors--or we were, until the thread was derailed when there was a disagreement on word choice. Actions speak loudly. I'm standing up for one member having the right to use the appropriate word without having others jump on him. Odd, this world in which we live, where religion--or any perception thereof--is reason to attack someone. Theism, athism, agnosticism, or whatever are personal. We shouldn't be pushing our choice on anyone else. It is very telling that the trend seems to be to attack belief in anything.
”Trust” is not ”faith”. Two different words. Trust is a part of faith. The fact that an apprapoe word makes some people apparently go into effusive denial is amusing. Are you insinuating that athiests have no morals, or that theists do? Those assumptions don't necessarily follow.
Your refusal to accept faith as just a descriptive word IS total bullshit. Without definitions (aka ”meaning”) words are useless. Dennis can only speak of his own faith. Do you want him to speak of yours? Dennis went on to claim that what, a lack of faith would lead him to do bad things? I couldn't say. Perhaps it would.
As far as the submit button, are you seriously claiming that, like harness vendors, past experience dictates future success? In that case, no more ball games, races, etc. The future is written. Whomever won/lost last time will do so again.
Originally posted by tshark: As far as the submit button, are you seriously claiming that, like harness vendors, past experience dictates future success? In that case, no more ball games, races, etc. The future is written. Whomever won/lost last time will do so again.
No. I'm saying it dictates expectations. Computers are obviously much easier to predict than humans though, because they are not sentient (yet). And yes, that's pretty much how sporting events generally work. If one team has gone the entire season undefeated, and the wildcard team has gone without a win, then the undefeated team is expected to win. That's how odds are set for betting on the outcome. You take past results and make a calculated risk when placing a bet. Sometimes you get lucky. Most of the time, you don't.
As for harnesses, it's just like eBay. You make a calculated risk when you purchase a good or service, based on the seller's reputation. If their past reputation is good, you expect them to deliver as promised. That is exactly what happened here. If the OP didn't expect for phonedawgz to deliver as promised, then the money and harness wouldn't have been sent. This forum isn't particularly helpful in most of these scenarios though, until it's been an issue for far too long. The first year or so when it starts to happen, you get people replying but vendor's a good person, the harness I bought 10 years ago is excellent and never had a problem with vendor, and look at all that green in vendor's ratings bar! This only adds to the problem, unfortunately, especially when the vendor doesn't reply for themselves or make good on the deal, with clear evidence in the thread about what happened.
Originally posted by tshark: I must've missed where Dennis used the word ”athiest”. Please find me that quote. You aren't foaming at the mouth, are you? We're talking about harnesses and vendors--or we were, until the thread was derailed when there was a disagreement on word choice. Actions speak loudly. I'm standing up for one member having the right to use the appropriate word without having others jump on him. Odd, this world in which we live, where religion--or any perception thereof--is reason to attack someone. Theism, athism, agnosticism, or whatever are personal. We shouldn't be pushing our choice on anyone else. It is very telling that the trend seems to be to attack belief in anything.
A) Nobody is attacking Dennis. B) Dennis clearly used the worth faith in a religious context. C) Dennis claimed that lack of faith, is equivalent to being an evil person who thinks it's okay to perform any action, regardless of outcome.
B and C here are all that Patrick and I were addressing. Again, faith does not dictate whether a person is good or bad (as Dennis clearly stated it would). Actions do. The only attacking going on in this thread, that I can see, is your comments in rushing to the defense of someone else. Dennis is an adult and can hopefully think and type for himself (there is evidence that this is the case anyway, given his comments on this forum). He doesn't need you to defend him. You seem to be assuming that any denouncement of the involvement of faith, is some sort of attack on said faith. It is not.
Originally posted by dobey: This forum isn't particularly helpful in most of these scenarios though, until it's been an issue for far too long. The first year or so when it starts to happen, you get people replying but vendor's a good person, the harness I bought 10 years ago is excellent and never had a problem with vendor, and look at all that green in vendor's ratings bar! This only adds to the problem, unfortunately, especially when the vendor doesn't reply for themselves or make good on the deal, with clear evidence in the thread about what happened.
That isn't just a problem with vendors. I've seen many members gang up on one person, and others jump on the wagon for the same sorts of reasons (tenure, familiarity, green bar, etc). And it applies beyond the forum. Voting--even at car shows. I got in trouble for hiding names & handles on the cars until after voting, and only allowing 1 person through at a time. The complaint was that the wrong car won, as a result.
Patrick has even gently pointed this vendor to this thread in another thread, after the vendor posted recently. I'm not defending this vendor, but it probably would be difficult for the vendor on this thread, at this point. Still, SOMETHING would be nice.
Dennis made a brief comment to his belief; you took the superior attitude of trying to correct him.
Excuse me, but Dennis was the one expressing his "superior attitude" that "faith" was a requirement for "moral behavior". I find that attitude insulting, and I expressed my displeasure to Dennis in a civil manner.
quote
Originally posted by tshark:
Personally, I would've just overlooked that phrase you highlighted.
Great... it's too bad you couldn't have also "overlooked" the ensuing comments.
quote
Originally posted by tshark:
So, here is the distraction in the tech forum.
You have now become the "distraction" in this thread. Let it go.
[This message has been edited by Patrick (edited 09-14-2015).]
Originally posted by Patrick: Excuse me, but Dennis was the one expressing his "superior attitude" that "faith" was a requirement for "moral behavior". I find that attitude insulting, and I expressed my displeasure to Dennis in a civil manner.
”artificial support system” is a condescending term. You asked him to elaborate. He did. You made a civil comment, but then editorialized.
Dennis stated that belief in something was required. Moral behavior was an interpretation that you must've inferred. His comments applied to himself, and he stated you were free to use your own system. You are certainly doing that.
You found that attitude insulting, then turned around and did the same thing. I truly don't care what you do or don't believe, but you can't have it both ways.
Yes, I'm sure Dennis can defend himself, but he shouldn't have to.
Originally posted by tshark: You found that attitude insulting, then turned around and did the same thing. I truly don't care what you do or don't believe, but you can't have it both ways.
Yes, I'm sure Dennis can defend himself, but he shouldn't have to.
Yes, it was insulting for him to jump in this thread and claim that those without faith, have no morals. If he doesn't want to defend his position, he shouldn't make such statements. His assertion was that people without a faith system (ie, atheists) cannot possibly perform good actions, because there is no faith telling them what is bad and what is good. His statement also implied that those with certain faith systems cannot do bad, because their belief system tells them what is right and wrong.
That assertion is exactly what Patrick and I have a problem with, and which you seem to be defending for some reason.
That assertion is exactly what Patrick and I have a problem with, and which you seem to be defending for some reason.
It's funny how that works, isn't it? It's implied that we have nothing to guide our "moral behavior" (in other words we're immoral) if we don't have "faith" (religion)... and we're then criticized by a third party for objecting to this.
And of course no one who professes "faith" has ever acted in an improper manner.
This is why religion (and politics) don't belong in the tech forums. Save this waste of time and bandwidth for O/T.
Originally posted by dobey: Yes, it was insulting for him to jump in this thread and claim that those without faith, have no morals. If he doesn't want to defend his position, he shouldn't make such statements. His assertion was that people without a faith system (ie, atheists) cannot possibly perform good actions, because there is no faith telling them what is bad and what is good. His statement also implied that those with certain faith systems cannot do bad, because their belief system tells them what is right and wrong.
By the same token, Patrick made what would be considered insulting claims to theists. Again, you two are claiming he made statements that he did not in fact, actually make in this thread, unless you can quote me the statements you just claimed that he made. The Native Americans had a belief system. There still exist similar tribes in other countries, where they are every bit as primitive, only they're pagan. They have a belief system. If their beliefs say it's right to kill, does that jive with your belief?
quote
Originally posted by Patrick: It's implied that we have nothing to guide our "moral behavior" (in other words we're immoral) if we don't have "faith" (religion)...
Patrick, perhaps ”amoral” was the word you meant. Actions can be moral or immoral. Faith is not religion, no matter how much you may want to portray it so. Before you use these words, you may want to learn their origin and meaning. Are you now stating that you DO have a superior being (diety) guiding your moral behavior?
By the same token, theists love to jump on good ideas and claim them as their own, when the ideas far outdate any existing organized religion.
I think this thread pretty much sums up freshman year: social ethics, psychology of human nature, dichotomy of theism vs atheism, history in review, the welfare state, the evolution of man, and creative and critical thinking. Here I thought those requirements were useless, but 20-something years later, you guys proved me wrong.
It's a waste of time discussion, since you don't stick to facts. Bottom line, this vendor has behaved in a questionable manner. 1/4 of the world is theists.
[This message has been edited by tshark (edited 09-15-2015).]
Originally posted by tshark: By the same token, Patrick made what would be considered insulting claims to theists. Again, you two are claiming he made statements that he did not in fact, actually make in this thread, unless you can quote me the statements you just claimed that he made. The Native Americans had a belief system. There still exist similar tribes in other countries, where they are every bit as primitive, only they're pagan. They have a belief system. If their beliefs say it's right to kill, does that jive with your belief?
No. Dennis was very clearly talking about religious faith. You keep trying to make the claim he was not, in order to make you and him look like victims in this thread. I and Patrick are both not falling for it.
quote
Originally posted by Dennis LaGrua: A persons belief system governs their behavior. In simple terms if you do not believe in anything, then anything goes. I am not here to proselytize, but the guiding light in my life has been my faith. It has taught me honesty, generosity, compassion, love of neighbor and led me towards righteousness. If you have an alternate belief system that leads you to do good things then all the better. I've been married for 13 years and my wife still likes me so I must be doing something right- LOL.
Again, this exact quote of Dennis is implying that those who do not believe in anything, have no morals, and will do anything, and those that do believe in something, can do no wrong. And he is clearly talking about religious faith, not simply trust in others. I was simply stating that this is :BS: and faith has nothing to do with anything in this thread. YOU are the one that came in and tried to turn it into a more philosophical argument. I would have said discussion, but you are clearly not interested in discussing anything, as you are taking the defensive stance of attacking those whom you disagree with, rather than attempting to have any objective discussion on the matter.
I would challenge you to show us how the religious faith of phonedawgz makes him a superiorly moral and good person, but we both know that's impossible, because he clearly can't deliver on the promises made to customers. It is not his faith that makes him a good or bad person, it is his actions. Please feel free to enlighten us as to how that is not true though, and tell us how we don't know anything about faith.
