Destiny vs Free Will

[Wandering MGHOWParticipant 551]

I’m new to this site (although I’ve been MGTOW for a while now) so I really don’t want to ruffle anyone’s feathers. But reading through this topic I must say that Terminal Meme absolutely OWNED his side of the argument. The others came off as immature and rudimentary, sorry…

[John DoeParticipant 743]

Wandering MGHOW wrote:

I’m new to this site (although I’ve been MGTOW for a while now) so I really don’t want to ruffle anyone’s feathers. But reading through this topic I must say that Terminal Meme absolutely OWNED his side of the argument. The others came off as immature and rudimentary, sorry…

In what regard exactly?  Example(s) please.

[Anonymous 42]

Gee, whenever I feel like being insulted, slandered, degraded, ridiculed, mocked, laughed at, and basically HATED; instead of a simple conversation, key word(CONVERSE) I’ll run my f~~~ing ass off to the nearest thread that has the word “Atheist” at least I know with dead nuts certainty how I’ll be received……. I’m beginning to interpret the word Atheist to mean asshole 3rd degree…….   

[WolfgarParticipant 21]

Wandering MGHOW wrote:

I’m new to this site (although I’ve been MGTOW for a while now) so I really don’t want to ruffle anyone’s feathers. But reading through this topic I must say that Terminal Meme absolutely OWNED his side of the argument. The others came off as immature and rudimentary, sorry…

If you don’t want to “ruffle anyone’s feathers” then don’t say anything at all.  The act of stating an opinion on a topic such as this one is going to ruffle someone’s feathers.

But, I just can’t believe you when you say that “I really don’t want to ruffle anyone’s feathers” because by throwing out words like “immature” and “rudimentary” you are actively trying to “ruffle someone’s feathers”.

 

 

 

[harpo-my-“SON”Participant 2410]

Been away a few days men. Working for a man 74 years old..Good dude I guess, although  don’t know much about him and wont be asking many questions , as I need the work..He is quick to anger and has made the comment that nothing seems to bother me much..I just said, that I have gained nothing useful I can recall from feeling anger or frustration..He seems intrigued by my sense of calm..I will not talk about anything political or religious on the job…This could be several weeks of work for me, judging from what he is wanting done..Maybe more..

how does this fit into the topic at hand? Open minded tolerance or the willingness to let others have their beliefs and still maintain some sort of working relationship…I am more interested in that for my own practical reasons..The arguments here are a very interesting read and do shed some light on tolerance and willingness to accept that other people will have different ideas than our own..

Remember that the death toll from both sides of this argument did not come from the beliefs that side had, but from the intolerance of the beliefs of others…If I chose to be intolerant I become the worst believer or non-believer…No matter what side we take the side who refuses to accept the others rights and continues to force the others to conform and comply are tyrants…Tolerance is a necessary component of any society if it is to avoid the awful..

I was bound to be misunderstood, and I laugh at those who misunderstand me. Kind mockery at the well intentioned, but unfettered cruelty towards those would be prison guards of my creative possibilities. This so as to learn as much from misunderstanding as from understanding. Taking pleasure in worthy opponents and making language fluid and flowing like a river yet pointed and precise as a dagger. Contradicts the socialistic purpose of language and makes for a wonderful linguistic dance, A verbal martial art with constant parries that hone the weapon that is the two edged sword of my mouth.

[John DoeParticipant 743]

harpo-my-“SON” wrote:

No matter what side we take the side who refuses to accept the others rights and continues to force the others to conform and comply are tyrants…

How is forcing tolerance not tyranny?  After all, to tolerate means “to put up with”.  To say someone must tolerate a behavior means “they must put up with it, or else”.

Also, if I accept the beliefs of others and there beliefs are different than my own position of tolerance, would I then become intolerant myself?

[harpo-my-“SON”Participant 2410]

John Doe asked the question;

How is forcing tolerance not tyranny?  After all, to tolerate means “to put up with”.  To say someone must tolerate a behavior means “they must put up with it, or else”.

 

My whole paragraph he cherry-picked one sentence from. I never spoke of tolerating behavior, but only beliefs.

Remember that the death toll from both sides of this argument did not come from the beliefs that side had, but from the intolerance of the beliefs of others…If I chose to be intolerant I become the worst believer or non-believer…No matter what side we take the side who refuses to accept the others rights and continues to force the others to conform and comply are tyrants…Tolerance is a necessary component of any society if it is to avoid the awful..

John You are funny thinking I give a s~~~ if you tolerate my beliefs or not..I have said before no one can be forced to action simply by reading my words…Why not use my words in the context I meant for them to be understood..read the whole paragraph at once not just your cherry-picked sentence .Intolerance to the point of killing the opposition is what I consider the awful…so kill me or tolerate me, ha ha ha, but don’t accuse me of forcing anything on you.. This topic has had people talk about the death toll of both sides..How deadly are believers and non-believers….Tolerating behavior is not the same as tolerating beliefs…I would never advocate tolerating bad behavior, but someones beliefs are harmless to me..

I was bound to be misunderstood, and I laugh at those who misunderstand me. Kind mockery at the well intentioned, but unfettered cruelty towards those would be prison guards of my creative possibilities. This so as to learn as much from misunderstanding as from understanding. Taking pleasure in worthy opponents and making language fluid and flowing like a river yet pointed and precise as a dagger. Contradicts the socialistic purpose of language and makes for a wonderful linguistic dance, A verbal martial art with constant parries that hone the weapon that is the two edged sword of my mouth.

[John DoeParticipant 743]

harpo-my-“SON” wrote:

My whole paragraph he cherry-picked one sentence from. I never spoke of tolerating behavior, but only beliefs.

Beliefs are manifested in behavior.  Otherwise they are just thoughts.

If we are just expressing thoughts then what “deathtoll” is there exactly?

If I think one thing.  The other guy thinks another.  We both say we are right and “explain” why.  You say tolerance is right and we should both tolerate each others thoughts and in effect cease to disagree. By default you are saying you are right and we are wrong yet you are disagreeing with both of us.

Also this conversation is about metaphysical principles.  Right is right, wrong is wrong.  It isn’t about tolerance, but rather trying to understand or “discover” some core principles.

If I took a verse “out of context” and I don’t think I did, then it was either due to a misunderstanding on my part or a lack of clarity on yours.

You should tolerate my disagreeing with you otherwise you are intolerant.

 

 

 

[Anonymous 42]

Maybe we should all agree to disagree, and tolerate others disagreements with our agreements… Agreed? or disagreed? either way, we can agree…

[harpo-my-“SON”Participant 2410]

MG-TOWER   I can be in agreement once I can wrap my head around what is being agreed on.. I feel as long as no one is killing anyone else we are exercising tolerance on our own, with no force or coercion. I fail to understand John sometimes because he really gets out there to the point that I wonder if he can understand what he is saying himself. This is funny to me.

John Doe wrote; Beliefs are manifested in behavior.  Otherwise they are just thoughts.

My beliefs are manifested in reason not behavior I have reasons for believing what I believe. Not behaviors for belief..

John also wrote: If we are just expressing thoughts then what “deathtoll” is there exactly?

any time in history where believers and non-believers killed one another.. one example: the christian crusades

 

Johns words again: If I think one thing.  The other guy thinks another.  We both say we are right and “explain” why.  You say tolerance is right and we should both tolerate each others thoughts and in effect cease to disagree. By default you are saying you are right and we are wrong yet you are disagreeing with both of us.

Tolerance does not mean anyone has to agree or disagree. Be right or be wrong. Cease or begin to accept each others views or beliefs..You can be on any side of any position as long as you stop short of taking a physical action against someone. its nothing more than the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or beliefs that one does not necessarily agree with without bloodshed..No one is forcing you to be tolerant, but if you strike first most would say you are in the wrong because by getting physically violent you have gone beyond thoughts, opinions and beliefs. Now you must defend yourself because no one would blame someone for not being tolerant of your wrong behavior. You keep wanting to mix up tolerating harmless ideas thoughts opinions and beliefs with not so harmless aggressive behavior.. BEHAVIOR=action and no tolerance is expected…If you have a problem being tolerant then by all means reach out and slap some sense into someone, but be ready for retaliation, because that’s bad behavior. Is this not clear enough? I can’t force tolerance upon you with any online means at my disposal. This is not possible. I can scream it with capitals JOHN YOU MUST BE TOLERANT. does that have any better effect? I think not..

John wrote: Also this conversation is about metaphysical principles.  Right is right, wrong is wrong.  It isn’t about tolerance, but rather trying to understand or “discover” some core principles.

Now I won’t explain right and wrong to you. Your parent should have covered that at an early age, but I am starting to suspect they were much too tolerant of you. These core principals are not that difficult to understand.

John’s words: If I took a verse “out of context” and I don’t think I did, then it was either due to a misunderstanding on my part or a lack of clarity on yours.

You should tolerate my disagreeing with you otherwise you are intolerant.

I can tolerate your ideas,thoughts, principals,context,big words,small words,good expressions,bad expressions and temper tantrums..I have no problem tolerating anything you dish out online.keep in mind though none of this physically hurts me.   Bad behavior in a physical face to face situation would not be the same and no tolerance would be expected or given..

I was bound to be misunderstood, and I laugh at those who misunderstand me. Kind mockery at the well intentioned, but unfettered cruelty towards those would be prison guards of my creative possibilities. This so as to learn as much from misunderstanding as from understanding. Taking pleasure in worthy opponents and making language fluid and flowing like a river yet pointed and precise as a dagger. Contradicts the socialistic purpose of language and makes for a wonderful linguistic dance, A verbal martial art with constant parries that hone the weapon that is the two edged sword of my mouth.

[Anonymous 42]

harpo-my-“SON” wrote:

I fail to understand John sometimes because he really gets out there to the point that I wonder if he can understand what he is saying himself.

Harpomason, I understand John D, perhaps better than anyone in the room. He plays Devils advocate, easy to confuse where he’s coming from, my brother’s the exact same way, I’m one of the only people that can understand him, he enters points of view otherwise not considered during a debate, this frustrates the opposition and derails their thinking, most people merely spark critical thinking like lighting a small campfire and feeding it one stick at a time.

John’s the guy with five gallons of gasoline and a road flair, his language can be blinding to the guy with a match and some dried moss….I understand where he’s coming from, “leave no stone unturned”, he’s a bulldozer in a gravel pit, rather than a guy with a bucket and shovel…. That I think we can all agree, or disagree….agreed?

[John DoeParticipant 743]

Anonymous wrote:

Harpomason, I understand John D, perhaps better than anyone in the room. He plays Devils advocate, easy to confuse where he’s coming from, my brother’s the exact same way, I’m one of the only people that can understand him, he enters points of view otherwise not considered during a debate, this frustrates the opposition and derails their thinking, most people merely spark critical thinking like lighting a small campfire and feeding it one stick at a time. John’s the guy with five gallons of gasoline and a road flair, his language can be blinding to the guy with a match and some dried moss….I understand where he’s coming from, “leave no stone unturned”, he’s a bulldozer in a gravel pit, rather than a guy with a bucket and shovel…. That I think we can all agree, or disagree….agreed?

On break at work, but when I read this I had to respond.  I was called the “destroyer” in college much because I played the role of “devil’s advocate”.  They never said to this me openly, but I heard them whisper it.  I literally had people screaming at eachother and me.  Literally, screaming in a classroom.  Like I said before, I put everything and everyone to the test.  I love fire, what can I say?

[harpo-my-“SON”Participant 2410]

MG-TOWER  I see where your coming from about john D. He does like being the bull in the china cabinet..He should know by now that I will just laugh, sweep up the broken glass and show him that if he would proofread his comments closer he could do more damage and break all my crystal instead of just be mildly annoying. ha..ha.. I mean why be only a little difficult? When you could put some real effort into it and be totally impossible…

I was bound to be misunderstood, and I laugh at those who misunderstand me. Kind mockery at the well intentioned, but unfettered cruelty towards those would be prison guards of my creative possibilities. This so as to learn as much from misunderstanding as from understanding. Taking pleasure in worthy opponents and making language fluid and flowing like a river yet pointed and precise as a dagger. Contradicts the socialistic purpose of language and makes for a wonderful linguistic dance, A verbal martial art with constant parries that hone the weapon that is the two edged sword of my mouth.

[Anonymous 42]

I’ve always been observant about the world, and people around me. A trick I learned when I was a kid, was to stand back and let things fester in the mind of an opponent, you can watch them start to boil, giving you all the control over the argument, I literately got punched out a couple of times for using this technique. When you pause to adsorb what they’re saying, it gives you time to reload, so you can continue to endlessly frustrate their efforts and endeavors in ignorance or misconceptions. I hated when people in the wrong tried to convince me they’re right.

JD, You should meet my brother, It would be a classic example of an immovable object meets an unstoppable force. AT THE SPEED OF LIGHT!

[John DoeParticipant 743]

WTF happened with MGTOWER?

[Beware the LamiaeSpectator 89]

Thank you sir, I’m Terminal Meme though I stopped using that gmail account and use this name. I agree that I OWNED this thread.

I encourage you to seek out channels on youtube like Stardusk and Spetsnaz. These men are intelligent and have much to say for your male benefit. I didn’t even know about Stardusk when I wrote this thread and after I started listening to an incredibly smart man, I was relieved to hear him bringing up the same things I talk about and think of, and much more.

I can’t say it enough. If you are a thinking man, an atheist by default, who is interested in MGTOW, listen to Stardusk (Thinking Ape TV)

[Anonymous 42]

John Doe wrote:

WTF happened with MGTOWER?

I’m still here, it’s just Tower now. I just had some more official oppression hit close to home! I wouldn’t mind watching a mushroom forest sprout from all the cities around me, I’d be so f~~~ing happy I’d p~~~ my pants laughing…

 

[Sam RavenParticipant 181]

Anonymous wrote:

John Doe wrote:

WTF happened with MGTOWER?

I’m still here, it’s just Tower now. I just had some more official oppression hit close to home! I wouldn’t mind watching a mushroom forest sprout from all the cities around me, I’d be so f~~~ing happy I’d p~~~ my pants laughing…

Ah, good old “Castle Bravo” 15 Megaton nuclear shot.

Since we are talking free will related stuff in the Philosophy section, I will quote from my profile’s ‘Bio’:

“Deciding One’s Direction In Life Is Best Done Alone. You Have Always Been Alone Anyway If You Are Honest With Yourself.”

[Beware the LamiaeSpectator 89]

Im pretty hard on John Doe but Tower had it right…he comes into an argument thinking out loud taking multiple positions like consecutive sand bunkers in whatever direction his mind is going.

We dont need to know all that stuff and most of it is irrelevant or bunk. If he could focus his mental processing on suppressing one target with one stream of reason he’d be making his own Stardusk videos. Instead, hes stuck trying to reconcile his faith aginst insurmountable truths. Im pretty impressed by his endurance though. I just wish he’d come to a few revelations

[Anonymous 42]

What I can say subscribe and take a quiz and get results —- SPAM LINK REMOVED ——

1st wish:Bulls~~~ genie! 2n wish: flush! 3rd wish; never return!

[Author]

Posts