|
Post by Anittas on Aug 30, 2011 19:15:11 GMT -5
Anti can be anything that is in opposition or in contrast with something else, including something abstract, like an idea. That is why in philosophy and science you have thesis and anti-thesis.
|
|
|
Post by uz on Aug 30, 2011 19:16:05 GMT -5
Being ANTI, is putting energy in going "against", as opose to directing that energy towards an alternative. END-RESULT is ALWAYS null.
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Aug 30, 2011 19:17:47 GMT -5
Dude, just check the definition of the word, ok?
|
|
|
Post by uz on Aug 30, 2011 19:18:56 GMT -5
an·ti/ˈanˌtî/Preposition: Opposed to; against. Noun: A person opposed to a particular policy, activity, or idea. ------------------------------- Now go read a book, ok?
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Aug 30, 2011 19:33:23 GMT -5
Are you on drugs? I just said that "anti can be anything that is in opposition or in contrast with something else, including something abstract, like an idea". And then I asked you to check the definition of the word so that you would be convinced of what I just said. Why do you then paste the same information I was trying to convey to you?
You don't use correct punctuation, you capitalize words that shouldn't be capitalized, you misspell and don't understand the definition of words--even after one takes the time to explain them to you--and then you tell me to go read a book. Although reading a book would be a much better way to spend my time rather than trying to reason with you (and I do read books), I feel the need to tell you that you are utterly clueless on so many things; and unlike others, who have the capacity to gather information and analyze it, you seem incompetent of comprehending the most simplest tasks.
In case you're still not following me--and the risk is great that you still don't, here's a timeline:
Post 17: You say that being anti is being destrutive. Post 18: I say that anti doesn't have to be something destructive; instead, it can be used to disprove an idea. Post 19: You tell me that "anti" means to go against and paste some photos of riots. Post 20: I say, again, that anti can be something in opposition or in contrast to something abstract, such as an idea; and I give the clear example of antithesis. Post 21: You insist that anti means to--and I quote: "putting energy in going "against", as opose to directing that energy towards an alternative. END-RESULT is ALWAYS null" Post 22: I ask you to check the definition of the word. Post 23: You check the definition of the word and paste it here--the definition being the one that I tried so very hard to convince you of.
|
|
|
Post by uz on Aug 30, 2011 19:41:29 GMT -5
You're going off with your nonsense ramble again Annitas.
Religion - Anti-Relgion
Each oposite of each other. Being ANTI does not mean to always be destructive, BUT neither does Relgion. They flow together parallel.
The amount of damage Relgion can cause, is equivalent to the amount of damage the "anti" can cause.
I am only arguing that being "anti" isn't as productive as one might see, and it's counter-productiveness is quite evident if you just open your eyes.
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Aug 30, 2011 19:49:36 GMT -5
There is no ramble. You chose to engage in a semantical debate. No one forced you to. I took you seriously, I was being polite, I wasn't trying to provoke anything, and you insulted me. What would you have done in my place?
I'm not Jesus. I don't turn my other cheek.
|
|
|
Post by uz on Aug 30, 2011 19:54:50 GMT -5
This is how this all started;
Everything I posted after this statement of yours is coherent, and valid.
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Aug 30, 2011 20:16:41 GMT -5
Not really. You didn't choose to debate the subject of whether religion is destructive, manipulative and whether it hinders progress, as I stated in that message. You focused instead on the definition of "anti" and spoke in a general sense, saying that it is destructive.
However, if we are to connect religion to anti-religion we might come to the realization that much of Western philosophy, starting with the great rationalists such as Spinoza who opposed religion (keyword: anti) and promoted pantheism--and whose philosophy influenced the writings of philosophers such as Voltaire and Nietzsche, we can reasonbly agree that being anti, as in writing an antithesis, spreading its philosophy and attempting to reduce the impact of religion can be something that benefits society. Otherwise, the state would not be secular (officially or de-facto) and the Church might still hinder the works of scientists such as Copernicus, Galileo, and Darwin.
And long before the aforementioned people lived, you had Socrates and his stoic collegues who at times would be at odds with the Athenian democracy. Socrates was convicted and sentenced to death for not believing in the gods and for corrupting the youth. Thus, again, the keyword being anti-religion.
Societies that haven't been anti-religion either had a very tolerant religion, such as Buddism, or they were not able to reform. In the case of the latter, I will refrain from naming any examples.
So as you can see, being anti-religion--as I have mentioned above--doesn't always mean, as you put it so eloquently, "END-RESULT is ALWAYS null".
|
|
|
Post by uz on Aug 30, 2011 20:22:36 GMT -5
I was focusing on the defintion "anti" in the context you were using it in genius.
I still stand by everything I posted, you just happend to over complicate the discussion, when I clearly was responding to your exact-post.
|
|
|
Post by Anittas on Aug 30, 2011 20:26:35 GMT -5
The context where I used the word was on religion and my previous post covers that subject, also. But okay. Let's agree to disagree--whatever the disagreement is.
|
|
|
Post by uz on Aug 30, 2011 20:28:09 GMT -5
The Balkans at its best. ;D
|
|
ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
Post by ivo on Aug 30, 2011 22:42:33 GMT -5
Anittas giving out English lessons, yet again. Lol
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Aug 31, 2011 1:46:35 GMT -5
stfu aziz
|
|
ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
Post by ivo on Aug 31, 2011 8:13:55 GMT -5
Lol. Don't be upset my friend. Be cool.
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Aug 31, 2011 8:25:43 GMT -5
alright. now stfu
|
|
ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
Post by ivo on Aug 31, 2011 9:00:09 GMT -5
^ Lol. Retard.
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Sept 1, 2011 3:03:38 GMT -5
ok lol
|
|
|
Post by uz on Sept 1, 2011 13:18:23 GMT -5
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA^
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Sept 2, 2011 5:50:44 GMT -5
UZ, STFU before i start calling you Uziz ;D, now go on, make an alliance with the mongol!!! i know its your only chance ... HA HA HA
|
|