[MD] Nagarjuna and the MOQ

[david buchanan]

Mark said to Ham:
When some do not have any idea how to refute an argument, they will attack you personally.  Has happened to me until they learned not to debate me. Happens to Marsha, John, and others who are serious about progressing MoQ.


dmb says:
That's hilarious. Reminds me of the UFOlogists who condemn the scientific community for being skeptical about their scientifically impossible claims. In both cases, we have ridiculous, delusional, self-aggrandizing claims that don't address any of the actual criticism. Like the conspiracy theorist, the lack of evidence is only taken as proof of the conspiracy's effectiveness. Or the bible-thumper who takes your disagreement as proof that the devil's got a hold of you. There is no point in talking to such people, but it certainly isn't because their arguments are irrefutable. Quite the opposite. It's because they are apparently oblivious to the fact that their arguments are completely worthless.

Marsha is pushing vacuous nihilism where there should be nothing but values and morals. John is pushing old-school theism where there should be non-theistic philosophical mysticism. Ham is pushing the metaphysical framework (SOM) where there should be a philosophy that begins by rejecting that framework. I guess I can only speak for myself because other folks might have their own reasons for ignoring them. As I see it, some people hang around here even though they are basically incapable of having a real debate. I have tried, believe me, but some people cannot be reasoned with. Some people prove this over and over again. And that's how I learned not to debate them, by trying to. Again, it's not because they were irrefutable but because they are unreasonable and/or hopelessly lost.