is there a singular agreed upon definition of that word?
-
-
Replying to @danlistensto @Intrinsic29
I think as to form though not precise content.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PereGrimmer @Intrinsic29
I don't know what you're trying to say. Can you rephrase?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @danlistensto @Intrinsic29
I think there is an agreed upon (though perhaps not singular) definition of the word "God," even if no wide agreement about the epistemic status or properties of God, such that competent English users can make sense of sentences about the "Christian God," "MU Gods," etc.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PereGrimmer @Intrinsic29
His sentence is the answer to a hypothetical question: "what is God?" he answered psychologically rather than theologically. I don't see the problem with this.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @danlistensto @Intrinsic29
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).
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @PereGrimmer @Intrinsic29
sure. don't be surprised when a depth psychologist talks about depth psychology though.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @danlistensto @PereGrimmer
They should probably try to replicate a study first.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Intrinsic29 @PereGrimmer
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.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @danlistensto @PereGrimmer
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.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
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.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.