How to discuss with a monistic idealistic solipsistic?

God, the FSM, and everything else.
User avatar
mirror93
Poster
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 5:06 pm

How to discuss with a monistic idealistic solipsistic?

Postby mirror93 » Wed Aug 16, 2017 7:44 am

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Last edited by mirror93 on Sun Oct 22, 2017 12:05 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29469
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: How to discuss with a monistic idealistic solipsistic?

Postby Gord » Wed Aug 16, 2017 8:59 am

Stop going on facebook.

Problem: Solved.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7639
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: How to discuss with a monistic idealistic solipsistic?

Postby TJrandom » Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:16 am

Please... do not invite him here.

User avatar
Cygnus_X1
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1482
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2014 4:08 am
Location: Middle Of Nowhere

Re: How to discuss with a monistic idealistic solipsistic?

Postby Cygnus_X1 » Wed Aug 16, 2017 3:29 pm

"I'm trying to have a discussion with a moron in a FB group"

I'm much more interested in why people feel compelled to argue with morons. You can usually tell within a couple of posts that someone fits that category...and beyond that you are wasting your time and driving yourself to apoplexy for no good reason. There will always be loons who believe in chemtrails, the flat Earth, Nibiru, or who think their mind is the only one that exists. They are precisely what the Block function in Facebook was invented for.
100,000 lemmings can't be wrong.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7639
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: How to discuss with a monistic idealistic solipsistic?

Postby TJrandom » Wed Aug 16, 2017 5:43 pm

Nibiru - had to look that one up. Thanks! Block function indeed.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2064
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: How to discuss with a monistic idealistic solipsistic?

Postby Nikki Nyx » Wed Aug 16, 2017 6:33 pm

Tell him to test his theory by walking out into oncoming traffic and calling the 18-wheeler heading toward him at 100km/hr a "thought story."
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
digress
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1692
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 2:11 am
Custom Title: doomer
Contact:

Re: How to discuss with a monistic idealistic solipsistic?

Postby digress » Wed Aug 16, 2017 10:02 pm

mirror93 wrote:I'm a materialistic and I'm trying to have a discussion with a moron in a FB group who is a monistic idealistic and kinda solipsistic,

Everything I say to him he dismiss as a "thought story".

His first argument is that nothing can be known or proven with thought, and that experience can only be direct, because concepts cannot capture experience.
"a blue color cannot be described to a blind-man from birth, that's how useless concepts are to describe 'experience' of blue."
So, based on this premise, anything that I say to him, he dismiss as a 'thought story', If I tell him that he is a person, with a mind with his consciousness, he will dismiss as a thought story.


His second argument is that everything is God. and only God can be known, because omniscience is known all the time. If you know that you don't know something, you still know, therefore, you know everything that there is to know, and If you don't know something, then it doesn't exist.
So, based on this premise, he conclude that anything not known to you now, doesn't exist.


His third argument is that everything is only experience, and that there is only experience. ( sight, hearing, taste, touch, smell and thought) and he treat all of it as 'objects', that GOD is aware of (not you), you are not the thinker and thought appears saying things that are not real, the only real is that everything is GOD Alone and you are all there is. he compares it to a dream, that in a dream, the experience of sound is not coming 'outside of you', but it is actually coming from the dream itself, and he says that the sound is actually coming from GOD/You. and that there is no sound, nor you, only GOD.


His analogies used are

'waves/ocean': we are waves (dream characters) in a ocean (god), but waves are always the ocean, therefore we are nothing other than god.

gold/ring: GOLD never transform into anything, it always remains as gold, it takes an appearance of ring, but still gold, , just like god never turn into a person, it takes an appearance of a person, but still god

-

I try to use scientific arguments and he ignores as "thought story" or beliefs or imagination, and he denies that I'm someone who can think and have my own memories and intentions and my own thoughts, he says that all is happening in god's dream and we are not aware of any of it and none of the thoughts that appear I'm aware, I'm just preordered to say everything I say, because all is in balance whole perfect god's dream, this whole {!#%@} he is telling me is getting me nervous


On your first argument. If experience dismisses thought because thought is unable to encapsulate experience then you may say to your friend (on FB) that we cannot be within god's thought because that is not how we experience it. And if your friend (on FB) argues the point simply retort his thought on the matter is unable to properly encapsulate the point vs. your experience. (this is easy, right?)

On your second argument. Say to your friend (on Fb) you don't know what he/she is talking about therefore it doesn't exist. (sooo easy peezy)

On your third argument. You may say to your friend (on FB), For someone who only experiences he/she sure does think a lot.

If your goal is to enlighten this person it is evident you are severely handicapped by coming here & asking we argue on your behalf. That is why I chose to retort in this manner.

Know that the reason you are handicapped is because you rely too heavily on science and likewise, why you received no decent response here (too many scientists).
  God is an idea.  

"For now, I am going to err on the side of freedom of speech..." -Pyrrho
"Every instance that has always existed is a piece of evidence that God is not needed." -yrreg
"I am not a concept..." -Confidencia

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11119
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: How to discuss with a monistic idealistic solipsistic?

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Aug 16, 2017 11:00 pm

Cygnus_X1 wrote:"I'm trying to have a discussion with a moron in a FB group"

I'm much more interested in why people feel compelled to argue with morons.

Its totally lack of experience with same. Nothing wrong with it at all. It will pass.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

Confidencia
Poster
Posts: 309
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 9:43 am

Re: How to discuss with a monistic idealistic solipsistic?

Postby Confidencia » Wed Sep 06, 2017 8:28 pm

mirror93 wrote:I'm a materialistic and I'm trying to have a discussion with a moron in a FB group who is a monistic idealistic and kinda solipsistic,

Everything I say to him he dismiss as a "thought story".

His first argument is that nothing can be known or proven with thought, and that experience can only be direct, because concepts cannot capture experience.
"a blue color cannot be described to a blind-man from birth, that's how useless concepts are to describe 'experience' of blue."
So, based on this premise, anything that I say to him, he dismiss as a 'thought story', If I tell him that he is a person, with a mind with his consciousness, he will dismiss as a thought story.


His second argument is that everything is God. and only God can be known, because omniscience is known all the time. If you know that you don't know something, you still know, therefore, you know everything that there is to know, and If you don't know something, then it doesn't exist.
So, based on this premise, he conclude that anything not known to you now, doesn't exist.


His third argument is that everything is only experience, and that there is only experience. ( sight, hearing, taste, touch, smell and thought) and he treat all of it as 'objects', that GOD is aware of (not you), you are not the thinker and thought appears saying things that are not real, the only real is that everything is GOD Alone and you are all there is. he compares it to a dream, that in a dream, the experience of sound is not coming 'outside of you', but it is actually coming from the dream itself, and he says that the sound is actually coming from GOD/You. and that there is no sound, nor you, only GOD.


His analogies used are

'waves/ocean': we are waves (dream characters) in a ocean (god), but waves are always the ocean, therefore we are nothing other than god.

gold/ring: GOLD never transform into anything, it always remains as gold, it takes an appearance of ring, but still gold, , just like god never turn into a person, it takes an appearance of a person, but still god

-

I try to use scientific arguments and he ignores as "thought story" or beliefs or imagination, and he denies that I'm someone who can think and have my own memories and intentions and my own thoughts, he says that all is happening in god's dream and we are not aware of any of it and none of the thoughts that appear I'm aware, I'm just preordered to say everything I say, because all is in balance whole perfect god's dream, this whole {!#%@} he is telling me is getting me nervous


If he is a monistic, idealistic, solipsistic moron then why are you so afraid of what he has to say? You are not doing yourself any favours here, particularly when you claim your knees are knocking :lol: and profess to having discussions with a FB group. Pull yourself together man!

Confidencia
Poster
Posts: 309
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 9:43 am

Re: How to discuss with a monistic idealistic solipsistic?

Postby Confidencia » Wed Sep 06, 2017 8:46 pm

mirror93 wrote:I'm a materialistic and I'm trying to have a discussion with a moron in a FB group who is a monistic idealistic and kinda solipsistic,

Everything I say to him he dismiss as a "thought story".

His first argument is that nothing can be known or proven with thought, and that experience can only be direct, because concepts cannot capture experience.
"a blue color cannot be described to a blind-man from birth, that's how useless concepts are to describe 'experience' of blue."
So, based on this premise, anything that I say to him, he dismiss as a 'thought story', If I tell him that he is a person, with a mind with his consciousness, he will dismiss as a thought story.


His second argument is that everything is God. and only God can be known, because omniscience is known all the time. If you know that you don't know something, you still know, therefore, you know everything that there is to know, and If you don't know something, then it doesn't exist.
So, based on this premise, he conclude that anything not known to you now, doesn't exist.


His third argument is that everything is only experience, and that there is only experience. ( sight, hearing, taste, touch, smell and thought) and he treat all of it as 'objects', that GOD is aware of (not you), you are not the thinker and thought appears saying things that are not real, the only real is that everything is GOD Alone and you are all there is. he compares it to a dream, that in a dream, the experience of sound is not coming 'outside of you', but it is actually coming from the dream itself, and he says that the sound is actually coming from GOD/You. and that there is no sound, nor you, only GOD.


His analogies used are

'waves/ocean': we are waves (dream characters) in a ocean (god), but waves are always the ocean, therefore we are nothing other than god.

gold/ring: GOLD never transform into anything, it always remains as gold, it takes an appearance of ring, but still gold, , just like god never turn into a person, it takes an appearance of a person, but still god

-

I try to use scientific arguments and he ignores as "thought story" or beliefs or imagination, and he denies that I'm someone who can think and have my own memories and intentions and my own thoughts, he says that all is happening in god's dream and we are not aware of any of it and none of the thoughts that appear I'm aware, I'm just preordered to say everything I say, because all is in balance whole perfect god's dream, this whole {!#%@} he is telling me is getting me nervous



If your goal is to enlighten this person it is evident you are severely handicapped by coming here & asking we argue on your behalf. That is why I chose to retort in this manner.


Severely handicapped is an understatement, that he cannot think for himself is painfully obvious.


Know that the reason you are handicapped is because you rely too heavily on science and likewise, why you received no decent response here (too many scientists).


That's the problem with this forum, unless it is in a book marked convention they are not prepare to exercise critical analysis.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11119
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: How to discuss with a monistic idealistic solipsistic?

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Sep 06, 2017 10:10 pm

I would modify the well known statement of "It takes two fools to have an argument." to: "It takes a moron to agrue with a moron."

I assume you get the drift here although you are doing more than arguing, by posting here. You can't resolve the "argument" either. You got some solipsism, and not the good kind, going on as well.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
gorgeous
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4211
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: How to discuss with a monistic idealistic solipsistic?

Postby gorgeous » Wed Sep 06, 2017 10:53 pm

" is getting me nervous"-----yes...a part of you knows it is true...and what you have been taught is an illusion...
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

User avatar
mirror93
Poster
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 5:06 pm

Re: How to discuss with a monistic idealistic solipsistic?

Postby mirror93 » Sun Oct 22, 2017 12:04 am

Confidencia wrote:
mirror93 wrote:I'm a materialistic and I'm trying to have a discussion with a moron in a FB group who is a monistic idealistic and kinda solipsistic,

Everything I say to him he dismiss as a "thought story".

His first argument is that nothing can be known or proven with thought, and that experience can only be direct, because concepts cannot capture experience.
"a blue color cannot be described to a blind-man from birth, that's how useless concepts are to describe 'experience' of blue."
So, based on this premise, anything that I say to him, he dismiss as a 'thought story', If I tell him that he is a person, with a mind with his consciousness, he will dismiss as a thought story.


His second argument is that everything is God. and only God can be known, because omniscience is known all the time. If you know that you don't know something, you still know, therefore, you know everything that there is to know, and If you don't know something, then it doesn't exist.
So, based on this premise, he conclude that anything not known to you now, doesn't exist.


His third argument is that everything is only experience, and that there is only experience. ( sight, hearing, taste, touch, smell and thought) and he treat all of it as 'objects', that GOD is aware of (not you), you are not the thinker and thought appears saying things that are not real, the only real is that everything is GOD Alone and you are all there is. he compares it to a dream, that in a dream, the experience of sound is not coming 'outside of you', but it is actually coming from the dream itself, and he says that the sound is actually coming from GOD/You. and that there is no sound, nor you, only GOD.


His analogies used are

'waves/ocean': we are waves (dream characters) in a ocean (god), but waves are always the ocean, therefore we are nothing other than god.

gold/ring: GOLD never transform into anything, it always remains as gold, it takes an appearance of ring, but still gold, , just like god never turn into a person, it takes an appearance of a person, but still god

-

I try to use scientific arguments and he ignores as "thought story" or beliefs or imagination, and he denies that I'm someone who can think and have my own memories and intentions and my own thoughts, he says that all is happening in god's dream and we are not aware of any of it and none of the thoughts that appear I'm aware, I'm just preordered to say everything I say, because all is in balance whole perfect god's dream, this whole {!#%@} he is telling me is getting me nervous



If your goal is to enlighten this person it is evident you are severely handicapped by coming here & asking we argue on your behalf. That is why I chose to retort in this manner.


Severely handicapped is an understatement, that he cannot think for himself is painfully obvious.


Know that the reason you are handicapped is because you rely too heavily on science and likewise, why you received no decent response here (too many scientists).


That's the problem with this forum, unless it is in a book marked convention they are not prepare to exercise critical analysis.


Actually I wanted to troll them. I was an internet troll, praise kek
I can also lie and act very well
socialists go nuts :twisted:

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29469
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: How to discuss with a monistic idealistic solipsistic?

Postby Gord » Sun Oct 22, 2017 2:08 am

mirror93 wrote:socialists go nuts :twisted:

Socialism is the one true path to enfrablement.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

Confidencia
Poster
Posts: 309
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 9:43 am

Re: How to discuss with a monistic idealistic solipsistic?

Postby Confidencia » Sun Oct 22, 2017 9:00 am

mirror93 wrote:
Confidencia wrote:
mirror93 wrote:I'm a materialistic and I'm trying to have a discussion with a moron in a FB group who is a monistic idealistic and kinda solipsistic,

Everything I say to him he dismiss as a "thought story".

His first argument is that nothing can be known or proven with thought, and that experience can only be direct, because concepts cannot capture experience.
"a blue color cannot be described to a blind-man from birth, that's how useless concepts are to describe 'experience' of blue."
So, based on this premise, anything that I say to him, he dismiss as a 'thought story', If I tell him that he is a person, with a mind with his consciousness, he will dismiss as a thought story.


His second argument is that everything is God. and only God can be known, because omniscience is known all the time. If you know that you don't know something, you still know, therefore, you know everything that there is to know, and If you don't know something, then it doesn't exist.
So, based on this premise, he conclude that anything not known to you now, doesn't exist.


His third argument is that everything is only experience, and that there is only experience. ( sight, hearing, taste, touch, smell and thought) and he treat all of it as 'objects', that GOD is aware of (not you), you are not the thinker and thought appears saying things that are not real, the only real is that everything is GOD Alone and you are all there is. he compares it to a dream, that in a dream, the experience of sound is not coming 'outside of you', but it is actually coming from the dream itself, and he says that the sound is actually coming from GOD/You. and that there is no sound, nor you, only GOD.


His analogies used are

'waves/ocean': we are waves (dream characters) in a ocean (god), but waves are always the ocean, therefore we are nothing other than god.

gold/ring: GOLD never transform into anything, it always remains as gold, it takes an appearance of ring, but still gold, , just like god never turn into a person, it takes an appearance of a person, but still god

-

I try to use scientific arguments and he ignores as "thought story" or beliefs or imagination, and he denies that I'm someone who can think and have my own memories and intentions and my own thoughts, he says that all is happening in god's dream and we are not aware of any of it and none of the thoughts that appear I'm aware, I'm just preordered to say everything I say, because all is in balance whole perfect god's dream, this whole {!#%@} he is telling me is getting me nervous



If your goal is to enlighten this person it is evident you are severely handicapped by coming here & asking we argue on your behalf. That is why I chose to retort in this manner.


Severely handicapped is an understatement, that he cannot think for himself is painfully obvious.


Know that the reason you are handicapped is because you rely too heavily on science and likewise, why you received no decent response here (too many scientists).


That's the problem with this forum, unless it is in a book marked convention they are not prepare to exercise critical analysis.


Actually I wanted to troll them. I was an internet troll, praise kek
I can also lie and act very well
socialists go nuts :twisted:


Then you should do what you do best, no one really cares. Your problem seems to be that you don't actually know what you want.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26775
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: How to discuss with a monistic idealistic solipsistic?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sun Oct 22, 2017 9:56 pm

Confidencia wrote: That's the problem with this forum, unless it is in a book marked convention they are not prepare to exercise critical analysis.
Again, you simply keep lying and repeating your religious mantras, to protect your silly religion.

You have been told numerous times that the skeptics on this forum use the scientific method. You simply don't know what that is, as science scares you and your medieval religious world view.
:lol:

Confidencia
Poster
Posts: 309
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 9:43 am

Re: How to discuss with a monistic idealistic solipsistic?

Postby Confidencia » Mon Oct 23, 2017 9:45 pm

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Confidencia wrote: That's the problem with this forum, unless it is in a book marked convention they are not prepare to exercise critical analysis.
Again, you simply keep lying and repeating your religious mantras, to protect your silly religion.

You have been told numerous times that the skeptics on this forum use the scientific method. You simply don't know what that is, as science scares you and your medieval religious world view.
:lol:


Whether you care to acknowledge it or not modern science is based on convention. If you could keep your head out of the books long enough you could perhaps see it for yourself. But I can understand why you don't. A cosy sock is more appealing than the naked truth.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26775
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: How to discuss with a monistic idealistic solipsistic?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Mon Oct 23, 2017 10:36 pm

Matthew Ellard wrote: You have been told numerous times that the skeptics on this forum use the scientific method. You simply don't know what that is, as science scares you and your medieval religious world view. :lol:
Confidencia wrote:Whether you care to acknowledge it or not modern science is based on convention.
No. Modern science works on the scientific method which produces results. It is your outdated medieval religion that is conventional.

Name one invention that has come from your silly religion? Yet I can create an almost endless list of inventions from scientists using the scientific method.

Why is your religion so useless?

User avatar
mirror93
Poster
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 5:06 pm

Re: How to discuss with a monistic idealistic solipsistic?

Postby mirror93 » Wed Oct 25, 2017 6:46 am

Confidencia wrote:
Matthew Ellard wrote:
Confidencia wrote: That's the problem with this forum, unless it is in a book marked convention they are not prepare to exercise critical analysis.
Again, you simply keep lying and repeating your religious mantras, to protect your silly religion.

You have been told numerous times that the skeptics on this forum use the scientific method. You simply don't know what that is, as science scares you and your medieval religious world view.
:lol:


Whether you care to acknowledge it or not modern science is based on convention. If you could keep your head out of the books long enough you could perhaps see it for yourself. But I can understand why you don't. A cosy sock is more appealing than the naked truth.


There is no such thing as "Naked truth" or "true nature"
these are religious and hippie jargons
science does pretty well the job explaning a lot of {!#%@} we didn't know before.
what your philosophy made to the world?
alleviate "suffering" from gullible people??
well, we have some pills that does the same

Confidencia
Poster
Posts: 309
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 9:43 am

Re: How to discuss with a monistic idealistic solipsistic?

Postby Confidencia » Thu Oct 26, 2017 6:29 pm

mirror93 wrote:
Confidencia wrote:
Matthew Ellard wrote:
Confidencia wrote: That's the problem with this forum, unless it is in a book marked convention they are not prepare to exercise critical analysis.
Again, you simply keep lying and repeating your religious mantras, to protect your silly religion.

You have been told numerous times that the skeptics on this forum use the scientific method. You simply don't know what that is, as science scares you and your medieval religious world view.
:lol:


Whether you care to acknowledge it or not modern science is based on convention. If you could keep your head out of the books long enough you could perhaps see it for yourself. But I can understand why you don't. A cosy sock is more appealing than the naked truth.


There is no such thing as "Naked truth" or "true nature"
these are religious and hippie jargons
science does pretty well the job explaning a lot of {!#%@} we didn't know before.
what your philosophy made to the world?
alleviate "suffering" from gullible people??
well, we have some pills that does the same


It doesn't matter mirror93. I'm not inclined to be giving the ABC of everything I post to everyone that replies, much less to someone who hasn't quite grasped the basic fundamental principles of life. Perhaps you should take one of those pills yourself. It might help.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11119
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: How to discuss with a monistic idealistic solipsistic?

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Oct 26, 2017 9:32 pm

Confidencia wrote: Whether you care to acknowledge it or not modern science is based on convention.


Good example of a statement so overbroad as to be useless if not just simply false.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26775
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: How to discuss with a monistic idealistic solipsistic?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Oct 26, 2017 11:12 pm

Confidencia wrote: It doesn't matter mirror93. I'm not inclined to be giving the ABC of everything I post to everyone that replies,
I see...... So you are simply spamming your religion like a Scientologist and running away from answering any direct questions. :lol:


Return to “Belief, Nonbelief, and Philosophy”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest