And your point is what exactly? I mean, do you think that you've enlightened things? Since this is at the root of the discussion here, tell me Pan...

What does it take for something to be true?

Nothing, true just is...


Now answer my questions.

Oh my...

So now, you've unwittingly admitted that you do not know what it takes for a statement to be true, but yet you expect the reader to trust your judgment?

I mean... really?

--

I have answered the questions you've asked several times over. Go look for yourself and respond to what has already been said. We'll pick the conversation back up from there.

Such class.

Pan,

Your words clearly suggest that you're after another's moral judgment on the matter at hand so that you can argue about who's right/wrong. That is a waste of time. You cannot know that much if you do not know what it takes for a statement to be true. I mean, moral judgment comes in statement form.

So, I'm just curious, are you willing to stop the emotionally immature juvenile antics and have one of those "intellectually honest" conversations that you speak of or not?

Your words do not give me confidence that you are capable of said conversation...

Justifying your claims would be a good start. Let's talk about what it takes for a statement to be true, perhaps that will make some headway.

The irony is thick. I did not ask about your confidence in my capability. I asked about your willingness.

Are you or are you not willing to engage in such a conversation?

I've always been willing. When you can respond by answering my questions without lying, deflecting or name-calling, it will continue.

I take that as a "no".

I'll take that to mean you have no intention of dealing honestly.



"I've always been willing. When you can respond by answering my questions without lying, deflecting or name-calling, it will continue. "


Damn you're friggin predictable, check page 10...

How can one expect any of their claims to be taken seriously, including but not limited to knowing what lying is, when s/he does not know what it takes for a statement to be true?



Honesty is good, but it only requires stating what one believes to be true. I mean, when one is misrepresenting their own belief, then they are lying. For instance, it seems that you believe everything you post. Unlike some, that's not for me to say one way or the other. I assume honest testimony until good reason is had to think otherwise, which is building by the way. What I do know and can say is that honesty testimony(belief) alone does not make it true, and much of what you've posted during this discussion is obviously false and/or self-contradictory. That can be proven by what is evident for all to see in the this thread. What cannot be proven, as far as I can tell, is whether or not you're lying.

It's intellectually dishonest for a speaker to hold a listener to a behavioral criterion during discourse that the speaker does not hold to themself.

Ready yet?

"I've always been willing. When you can respond by answering my questions without lying, deflecting or name-calling, it will continue. "


Prove me wrong if you can.

Make your claim.

I claim:
1. creativesoul will continue the ad-homs.
2. He has misrepresented my words.
3. He will not answer the 2 direct questions posed earlier.

I'm not sure what you think qualifies as an ad hom. The alleged misrepresentation needs to be shown. The two questions have already been answered several times over. Go look.