ChatterBank3 mins ago
I Saw This In A Forum About Pilgrimages. Is It Worth Sharing?
47 Answers
The Danish scientist, mathematician, inventor, designer, author, poet Piet Hein created many wise small poems. Here is one:
The road to wisdom? Well, it's plain
And simple to express:
Err
and err
and err again,
but less
and less
and less
The road to wisdom? Well, it's plain
And simple to express:
Err
and err
and err again,
but less
and less
and less
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by sandyRoe. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Dear Birdie1971,
First, welcome back. I was a bit concerned at your absence but assumed the most likely reason was the weather disrupting certain localities. I even asked on the corresponding site.
The thrust of my argument is that this horrendous criminality can best be effectively stated via the below:
(i) The local state law enforcement agencies
(ii) Peaceful protest by the RC congegration of whatever effective nature;
(iii) You may noticed that I have added a third activity. This latter would be the threat of exclusion and effective exclusion of the "Holy See" from the UN unless the RC provide timelines for cleansing activities and meet their targets.
I believe these activities would be far more effective than your, mine and the UN's verbal protests. I also believe that history proves this to be the case.
At no stage have I argued against such protestations!
I simply believe that the RC Church will never act without the genuine threat of force and its implementation if necessary.
In the light of the above I find your summary of my position downright dishonest. Indeed given your pompous and ignorant attitude of no quarter given (non asked by the way) I am happy to agree that this thread is
dead-in-the water. With your attitude and insulting language it is in the interests of the ab to end it ASAP.
Your answer to my question as to whether you believe the UN should be involved in C of E's similar heinous crimes is worthless as I cannot give your words any credibilty any more.
In deep disappointment and dissolusionment,
SIQ.
First, welcome back. I was a bit concerned at your absence but assumed the most likely reason was the weather disrupting certain localities. I even asked on the corresponding site.
The thrust of my argument is that this horrendous criminality can best be effectively stated via the below:
(i) The local state law enforcement agencies
(ii) Peaceful protest by the RC congegration of whatever effective nature;
(iii) You may noticed that I have added a third activity. This latter would be the threat of exclusion and effective exclusion of the "Holy See" from the UN unless the RC provide timelines for cleansing activities and meet their targets.
I believe these activities would be far more effective than your, mine and the UN's verbal protests. I also believe that history proves this to be the case.
At no stage have I argued against such protestations!
I simply believe that the RC Church will never act without the genuine threat of force and its implementation if necessary.
In the light of the above I find your summary of my position downright dishonest. Indeed given your pompous and ignorant attitude of no quarter given (non asked by the way) I am happy to agree that this thread is
dead-in-the water. With your attitude and insulting language it is in the interests of the ab to end it ASAP.
Your answer to my question as to whether you believe the UN should be involved in C of E's similar heinous crimes is worthless as I cannot give your words any credibilty any more.
In deep disappointment and dissolusionment,
SIQ.
SIQ -
After much deliberation I have concluded that you're either an idiot or that you are quite deliberately and wilfully failing to understand the central argument. You don't seem to be an idiot so I can only assume you're being deliberately obtuse.
You lay out your three point plan and say, "... I believe these activities would be far more effective than your, mine and the UN's verbal protests. I also believe that history proves this to be the case... I simply believe that the RC Church will never act without the genuine threat of force and its implementation if necessary... ". All very interesting but of no value to the discussion we are having. Your three point plan may work wonders. It may be the best plan in the world. The Church may well never act without a genuine threat of force - in fact, I agree with you wholeheartedly on that point. But the fact of the matter is that not one of your points is relevant to the issue under discussion. Nothing you have said has or should preclude the UN (or any other entity) from demanding that the RC Church stop harbouring child rapists and covering up their crimes. You're arguing about whether or not the Church will take any notice and that is not the issue.
I started by saying that you don't seem to be an idiot. I may have to revise that position in light of this little gem - "... Your answer to my question as to whether you believe the UN should be involved in C of E's similar heinous crimes is worthless as I cannot give your words any credibilty any more...".
If my answer to your binary question leads you to such a conclusion, please be aware that the feeling is entirely mutual. In fact, both your question and your subsequent response to my answer suggests to me that you are - and I chose my words carefully here - a cretin. You create a question based on the logical fallacy known as the "false dilemma" and then claim my answer leads you to conclude that my opinion lacks credibility! I'm not sure that I've come across such a blatant display of buffoonery in quite some time. If you are unaware of the "false dilemma" fallacy, (and I have every reason to believe that you are) it has been described accurately as:
"... an insidious tactic that has the appearance of forming a logical argument, but under closer scrutiny it becomes evident that there are more possibilities than the either/or choice that is presented..."
Please do yourself a favour and educate yourself. Your debating technique (such that it is) is woeful.
After much deliberation I have concluded that you're either an idiot or that you are quite deliberately and wilfully failing to understand the central argument. You don't seem to be an idiot so I can only assume you're being deliberately obtuse.
You lay out your three point plan and say, "... I believe these activities would be far more effective than your, mine and the UN's verbal protests. I also believe that history proves this to be the case... I simply believe that the RC Church will never act without the genuine threat of force and its implementation if necessary... ". All very interesting but of no value to the discussion we are having. Your three point plan may work wonders. It may be the best plan in the world. The Church may well never act without a genuine threat of force - in fact, I agree with you wholeheartedly on that point. But the fact of the matter is that not one of your points is relevant to the issue under discussion. Nothing you have said has or should preclude the UN (or any other entity) from demanding that the RC Church stop harbouring child rapists and covering up their crimes. You're arguing about whether or not the Church will take any notice and that is not the issue.
I started by saying that you don't seem to be an idiot. I may have to revise that position in light of this little gem - "... Your answer to my question as to whether you believe the UN should be involved in C of E's similar heinous crimes is worthless as I cannot give your words any credibilty any more...".
If my answer to your binary question leads you to such a conclusion, please be aware that the feeling is entirely mutual. In fact, both your question and your subsequent response to my answer suggests to me that you are - and I chose my words carefully here - a cretin. You create a question based on the logical fallacy known as the "false dilemma" and then claim my answer leads you to conclude that my opinion lacks credibility! I'm not sure that I've come across such a blatant display of buffoonery in quite some time. If you are unaware of the "false dilemma" fallacy, (and I have every reason to believe that you are) it has been described accurately as:
"... an insidious tactic that has the appearance of forming a logical argument, but under closer scrutiny it becomes evident that there are more possibilities than the either/or choice that is presented..."
Please do yourself a favour and educate yourself. Your debating technique (such that it is) is woeful.
For completeness and circularity -
http://
http://
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles6 mins ago
Crosswords13 mins ago
Connections # 323- Mon 29 April
Quizzes & Puzzles17 mins ago
Europe To Send Immigrants To Rwanda?
News46 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.