>>6083483Very little of what I've said is philosophical. Most of it actually relates to the practice of propaganda, so I would say it's more political or psychological than philosophical.
Just because you don't understand what I say, doesn't make it nonsense.
What did I misinterpret?
I'm also a convinced atheist, unless the concept of God is more alike to something like memes as a phenotype, or the logos as another person mentioned previously, so how would you being one trigger me? If anything, I was bothered by your inability to have a conversation, which I said.
An important aspect of critical thought is active thinking. This is where we question our own beliefs. It also allows us to entertain ideas that we don't necessarily believe, like hypothetical things. This is how I came to my own beliefs on the subject.
You, on the other hand, were unhappy with your own beliefs, and rather than criticizing them yourself, you sought out a source that would contradict them. You accepted, without questioning, a biased point of view, and accepted it because you wanted to, as a form of conformation bias.
Throughout this thread, you've repeatedly shown a lack of capacity for active and critical thinking, and a penchant for passive thinking.
It's obvious in the fact that none of your responses are original, you have no interest in questioning your own views or entertaining hypothetical or alternative explanations for God, and the bizarre, baseless, previously refuted, self-contradicting retorts.
At no point in your rambling, incoherent posts were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having read them. I award you no points, and may God [:^)] have mercy on your soul.
