If you can't substantiate the existence of a certain entity, just arbitrarily define it as something that exists. It's super intellectual. Join the dark web today.pic.twitter.com/h1dIzhhlF4
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
Yeah, totally. In fact I now declare that God means my unending desire for pizza from this point forward.
is that demonstrated or manifested in your perception and action though? if it isn't, you aren't addressing what he said.
No, I'm giving an example of how anyone can redefine God to anything they want and it'll be totally vacuous and ridiculous if it doesn't actually entail a point.
Alright, but I was just responding to your Q re: whether there was a singular agreed upon definition of the word. However, it was an observation similar to yours, I think, that led me to remark JBP had provided the depth psychologist's definition of God (re: their creed).
sure. don't be surprised when a depth psychologist talks about depth psychology though.
They should probably try to replicate a study first.
grasping at straws. he didn't reference a study and depth psychology (for better or worse) is mostly about playing with models of the unconscious mind. it isn't social psych.
Lol you're bending over backwards here to defend vacuous nonsense. Who's grasping straws? And the unconscious mind isn't directly accessible so you need replicated studies to understand it. Anything else is just random conjecture.
you have judged his statement as vacuous. I have not judged his statement one way or another. I'm trying to understand what it might mean. is it wrong to do that? is that "defending" a statement? my mistake. next time I'll just kneejerk and move on.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.