₦airaland Forum

Maynman:
If the errors are always detected and corrected how come words evolve away from their original use?

We are talking about words that originated in Ancient Greece but you want us to use current dictionary to explain it
You are confused.

They evolved through usage .

Words on their own don't mean anything. They are a combination of sounds which a group of people have attached meaning to, and this can change.

It's the things which they describe that's the most important thing.
What does the word, theist currently describe by those using it ?

Maynman:
we are talking about concepts that was developed centuries ago, but you want us to use modern dictionary to understand what ancient cultures did?

All these barren people.

The errors are always detected and corrected. The definition for theist in dictionaries still remain the same after several updates.

So what are you talking about? We should go back to antiquity with you? You're not serious

What you brought now won't help you. It's not possible to have the same errors in every dictionaries at the same time

I said the idea of word evolving from its original is unknown to you hence your recourse to antiquity.

Do you know what it means when everyone in the world agrees to the same thing, but only you disagrees with it.

Just rest. You're no longer making sense and have deflected from the main thing into irrelevancies

Maynman:
I don’t understand; we should no longer use the original meaning of words so we can better understand what it means and how we should use it?
I should not result to history(antiquity), I should be without knowledge like you?

This is appealing to ignorance.

You don't know what it means to appeal to ignorance.

You're the ignorant one who doesn't know that the meaning of a word can evolve from its original meaning and because of that produced something that reeks of crass ignorance

Just show me a current dictionary where a theist is described only has a person who worship Greek gods, or swallow your pride.


Your comments are shocking and very disturbing to read.

Maynman:
Jargons, a yahweh worshipper is a theist and he believes in his own God, an allah worshipper is a theist and he also believes in his own God but they don’t believe in the same “God”.
God is a title not a person, the Christian god is yahweh and muslim god is allah(hubal)

Where did you get this definition?

You're generalizing because your atheism is founded on the two popular abrahamic religion.

You're clueless about the others

Maynman:
That’s why i said most agnostics are uneducated about “god”.


Theists refers to those that worship greek gods. Atheists those that don’t worship greek gods.
Look up the origin of the word, THEOS

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_atheism#:~:text=The%20most%20important%20Greek%20thinker,intervention%20(see%20scientific%20determinism).

Theist are those who worship Greek gods? Lol

So every theist around you, Christians and Muslims especially, are worshipping Greek gods?

You have come again mayman.

Whenever you get stuck in an argument, the next thing is to either turn logic on its head or come up with nonsensical arguments to wriggle yourself away from it.

You avoided current definitions of the word, theist, in modern dictionaries to deceive yourself with its description in classical antiquity?

Are you for real?

The meaning of a word can evolve from usage and thats why dictionaries are updated all the time.

There are lots of words in English language or elsewhere that are no longer connected to their origin. You're obviously oblivious to this fact hence your recourse to antiquity.



You're not serious and just want to play.

Look for another person to continue with your weird talk. No longer interested.

Modified. Yes, agnostics don't know much about what God really refers to in religion . There thousands of God claims and descriptions. So by what means can he use to judge every single one of them?


Tell me you that know it all.

Maynman:
What is the meaning of Theist and A-theist?

A theist is someone who believes in what he calls God. An atheist has taken the opposite position to that of a theist, he doesn't believe in that same God the theist believes in .

An agnostic is neutral. He neither believes or disbelieve anything. He wants to be sure first before deciding.

Maynman:
What tiny, little facts does the agnostic have on an English word called “god”?

Even theists don’t have all facts, what small facts does the agnostic have?

As usual, you want to focus on superficial stuff

God is an English word which doesn't mean anything elsewhere.

It's the reality which it describes that's the most important thing, and what's that?

Can you describe it in your local language

Maynman:
Atheist means “without gods”.
Atheists are like people that don’t believe in santa, you call them “Asanta”.
Religions are Ideologies that’s why they are called Doctrines, you need to BELIEVE IT.

but agnostics are saying they don’t know if “god” exist or not
What does “god” mean then we know if it has ability to exist or not?

What qualifies a thing to be a “god”?

Agnostics only mentioned God hypothetically because they have not being able to confirm anything yet on the matter but relying on you and the theist for explanation. They simply have no clue or not sure what a God refers to .

Please go a find the meaning of agnosticism and what position they have taken .

I dont want to waste my time with unending arguments .

Maynman:
What does “god” mean that if it were to exist?
Where did the agnostic learn the word “god” why not “hrieub”?

I said he is neutral on the matter.

He's looking up to you and the theist to explain it for him since both if you are the ones claiming knowledge on the matter of gods or creators

Theist have described thousands of creators in their different religion which you have rejected based on what you know.

An agnostic doesn't have all the facts yet to assert anything confidently on the matter.

You know better so educate him.

Maynman:
What does a “god” mean?

I should be asking you that.

Maynman:
Yes they have made claims, they said they don’t if “god” exist or not.
Let them define the “god” that they don’t know exist or not.

You're wrong.

If at any time an agnostic makes a God claim, he does so hypothetically; "if a God were to exist ,then" ..........

That's not affirming anything real

Maynman:
Which “god” is the agnostic talking about?
Let him define it.

He is not talking about any god.

Maynman:
Let the agnostic define what is “god”?
What makes a thing to be a “god”?
Some people god is a stone, a stone does exist.

And when you say this god created the universe, define universe?
Universe means existence
So Do you mean this “god” created existence?

Agnostics have not made any God claim and so cannot explain anything to you .

An agnostics is doubter not a believer

Maynman:
Theism and Atheism are greek words and it refers to “theos”, look up what “theos” are and ask yourself if they have the ability to exist or not.
An agnostic does not have knowledge of what he is, he is sympathetic to the monotheist god.

Just show how agnostics are sympathetic to a monotheist god then you would be listen to . That's all.

You have not proven anything

The agnostic position when summarised is simply this;

I'm not going to take a definite position on the matter until I have all the facts concerning it .


In other words, I'm maintaining a neutral position, and not much interested in the discussion yet until there's enough evidence to assert something confidently.



That's it about agnostism at a glance.

Those who accuse agnostics of being sympathetic to theist don't know the difference between deism and agnosticism, and have also spoken from a position of bias .

A theist can equally make the same accusation since agnostics have not made any definite god claims, or support the ones made by any religion.




While an agnostic is someone who wants to be sure of what it really is before concluding, the theist and atheist, are opposed to each other from a position of false certainty caused by limited knowledge.

Deism shouldn't be confused with agnosticism. Deist, not agnostics, are the ones who claimed an unknowable God that doesn't interfere in human affairs.

Fortune118005:
Can you guys please send pictures of the match?

Ok

Fortune118005:
Can you guys please send pictures of the match?

Enjoy

Fortune118005:
Can you guys please send pictures of the match?

Enjoy

Maynman:
from mind you change am to brain, you now change it to thoughts.

You are lost!

You are the one who created the confusion.
I ask where thoughts come from .
You said mind
And can your mind operate without your brain while occupying a body?

Everything is in order from my end. No lost

Maynman:
What is controlling the brain?

The brain has its own mechanism that controls its functions

Maynman:
Don’t you need your brain to move your legs?
Why is your brain not “involuntarily controlling” your legs to move?
You still have to control your own legs to move why is that not same with your mind?
How come thought comes to you without thinking about it?

You keep contradicting yourself.

And we are talking about mind not brain, keep changing mouth.

This thread has been a very quite place . I don't want to derail it.

For the last time, I'm not changing mouth but telling you that your comparison is completely off.

Legs don't have the mechanisms to either produce thoughts on their own or help us generate any.You don't use your legs to think.

So what are you. comparing

When people talk of controlling their minds, they are actually referring to thoughts,
and not the mental structure or brain which it arises from or can be used to create it.

And one way people can control their thoughts, is by placing their attention elsewhere.

How have you ever tried to control your legs just like your thoughts. Tell me?

And when was the last time you hear anyone saying "I can control legs not to move "

Or maybe you're referring to the "leg" between your legs. Lol

That's the only one I know you struggle to control all the time.

You are the person changing mouth and running away from answering the main question I ask you about visualization.

It's enough now . Let benodic have back his thread.

Maynman:
So between your mind and leg, which one do you have total control over?


How does the mind work?

My legs don't move of their own accord.
So the idea of controlling them is crazy talk

I use them whenever I choose to. This is not the same with brain .

As I type this my brain is involuntarily controlling other organs in my body without me consciously doing anything about it.

My mind ,thoughts, can also trigger other body parts through the brain. Uncontrolled erections you sometimes have .Lol


Not so for legs

Why do you find it difficult to understand this beats me

Maynman:
Legs don’t move on their own because i have control over it.
Like you said thought occur on their own with or without your control.
How can you have stubborn thoughts if you have CONTROL over it?
Who is bringing the stubborn thoughts?
Who is controlling it?

So you see you don’t have total control of your mind.

My comparison is correct.
I have TOTAL control over my LEG, you don’t have TOTAL control over your MIND.
Sometimes your mind do overcome you, how possible

OK. May man's leg is the same as his brain. They function the same way.

His legs sometimes try to move him about and so he has to control it.

Maynman:
That’s because i have total control over my leg.

So you now see that you don’t have total control over your mind?
And sometimes your mind do overcomes you!

How does the mind work?

Legs don't move on their own . You use them to move about
So they idea of controlling them like the brain only exist in your imagination.


Somettimes stubborn thoughts can keep reoccurring in your mind and your struggle to shake them off or exert control
This doesn't happen with legs .They don't ever pull you to move you about



Your comparison is wrong.

Maynman:
Don’t you have control over your them again
That’s not the function of the leg, something is powerful because of their DUTY.

Don’t you have control over your mind/brain the same way you have over your leg?

Does your leg move on its own sometimes?

Mine doesn't

Thoughts occurring in one's head is normal process of how the mind works. The only control you have in such instance is to choose whether to follow through with it or ignore.

But it's not normal when your leg move on its own.

You will need to see a Doctor if that ever happens to you .

Your leg is not the same as your mind/brain

Maynman:
Good, so you agree that you and your mind are 2 different things.
It can do something without your permission.

And sometimes you follow its lead or not 😂

Can your leg do something without your permission?

Your leg is not the same as your mind/brain. The comparison is wrong.

Or does your leg originate thoughts?

Thoughts occurring in your brain is due to how the mind works. It regularly throws up memories of something already stored in it . That's why we remember.

So what are saying?

Maynman:
The mind is abstract, it doesn’t exist, so as your Ego.

I told you to tell me the mental “phenomenon” of the mind, you haven’t, keep changing mouth.

Not so Mayman


What you responded to when summarized, simply means,

If you find yourself in difficulty, or looking for solutions, use your mind to think or visualize a solution first, then follow it up by doing things to make it see the light of day. Most people don't this and because of this are stuck where they are .

The phone you have in your hand right now, existed first as imagination in someone's "head", the, inventor, before it was made manifest.

Infact, every creative invention in the world was achieved through the same.

Honestly yoir comments where off in that instance.

Here again below

Maynman:
That means that list is not correct on the functions of mind and brain.

The mind is the seat of Ego.

Have you noticed that sometimes to ascertain if someone is sane, they first ask that person what his name is?

What do you think a “name” is?

Forget this for now. You are not a professional.

@mayman

Now that you agree you use your mind to think of new ideas, visualize it, how then do you reconcile your response below with what you quoted?

Is it wrong to use one's imagination to create something in the mind and then go on to do things to bring it to fruition.


I couldn't understand the reason behind your comments hence my questions

Maynman:
According to the function you listed there, why do we have mad people?
Don’t they have brain or mind?

, I'm not a mental health practitioner to answer that question correctly.

Even doctors dont have all the answers . So what can a person like me I say?

Maynman:
Same you said thought and notions that occur to you without you thinking about them, same you said you have control over it, how did they occur to you in the first place?

Mind is a mental phenomenon.
Phenomenon means observable facts, how did you observe this phenomenon?

Your picture said nothing, or what is the aim?

Thoughts can occur in your mind from a memory of what is already stored in it, but you choose whether to follow its lead or not

Maynman:
Can you consciously create new thoughts without your mind?
Why do you need your mind before you can consciously do something?

If all thoughts don’t arise from the mind, then you should be able to do without it and get your own thoughts.

Where did I say thoughts dont originate from the mind or you can't create thoughts through it?

You continue to misrepresent me
Why?