?

Pardon me, I'm doing two things at once - some mending with needle and thread as my grandmother taught, and arguing about the entrance of propositions into a minds and inhibitions to such entrances. If I mix the two you will try to understand. Somewhere in the process I seem to have lost where I said the thing you claim that I said.

To be open minded is, as you say yourself, to be willing to argue that that which you hold to be true is wrong, thereby being willing to change your beliefs. That's the tizzy I am in. And saying I am in a tizzy is another platitude.

No. But to determine the falsity of a proposition requires it to be considered, which requires a mind open to considering it.

Vague platitude: "This is extremely dim. Surely you can see why."
Vague platitude: "a use of counter-example to prove"
Vague platitude: "queen of vague platitudes"
Vague platitude: "how ridiculous your claim"

Allow me to repeat since you did not get it. Anyone who says "only thickies . . ." is closed minded on the issue of thickies by definition. I claim to be less closed minded than that.

The fact that you claim to know one of my needs shows how closed minded you are.

As one who is less open minded than I, you, (not we) have proved nothing.

Anyone who says "only thickies . . ." is closed minded on the issue of thickies by definition.

That's what Plato is saying because he believs in God, and I agree with him from that perspective. Edpeterson is asking whether God is responsible for an act when different people view it as good and evil. It is one of the reasons I think God must be responsible for both good and evil.

Hint: My answer contained the word "yes."

I had a long, thoughtful answer written, hit "Submet" and it was gone because I was not logged in. It doesn't matter, just respond to what you think said.

Again, a fine straw man.

You assume that anyone who says something halfway reasonable has heard it somewhere.

We believe waht we are driven to believe, and seldom change for logical persuasion.

How are we to continue if you cannot see thourgh a grammatical error in a comment and address the comment rather than the grammar? Grammar is expected is poems, not in comments.

Go ahead and shoot, crack addict. The answer is still NONE! You can't get it through your head that I can actually see both sides of this issue and can relate to both sides. You always assume I have a position when most of the time I don't. It's a way I have of sorting through issues. It's part of being that thing you hate called open-minded

It doesn't? I hadn't noticed.

If a man thinks God is responsible for evil, then that man's opinion of God is suicidal, ruinous.

I don't wear bloomers.

By not reading them, you make yourself an able commentor.