SkyHigh

So , no methodology? I trust that you believe that, but you've provided nothing that I, or anyone else could use to confirm if your beliefs are tethered to reality. I don't think there's anything my "consciousness" is not privy to, as consciousness is simply a result of neurons firing.

Ok, so tell me what wisdom have you attained through Jordan Peterson? Ok big guy

Because no one cares (or even understands) what a metaphysical substrate is. Petersons claim to fame was blatantly lying about Canadian laws and he just been spouting nonsense ever since (granted he does use some pretty big words in his pseudo scientific terminology) but still just nonsense. Now go make your bed (see what I did there?), just because you're a grown man that still lives with his parents doesn't mean you don't have to do your chores

Jealous, why? I bet I'd look much better in a dress than Peterson. You should see my legs

Many here have very thin skin. DUI put me on ignore for simply saying that people that drive drunk, should lose their privilege to operate a motor vehicle, which was a comment in response to him bragging about the fact that he hadn't drove drunk in a whole year, and implied this was something we should celebrate. He didn't say he had stopped drinking, just that he was nice enough not to get behind the wheel, well at least for now.

Well I wouldn't be surprised if Peterson dressed up like an Asian girl behind closed doors.

Let me be clear I will never denigrate someone's beliefs nor discount any experiences they claim to have had. I think our impasse (in this case at least) is a question of metaphysics. I personally have no time for metaphysics because I consider myself a methodological naturalist, so if it's not measurable, observable and/or quantifiable, it is not part of my world view. I'm not saying that there is nothing that isn't natural, just that it doesn't factor into my beliefs. I'm not expecting you to give out any personal information you're not comfortable with, but I do wonder by what method did you determine that your experiences were of a supernatural nature or demonstrate these "additional realms"

No, you just don't understand. Like Steven Crowder wife, you must fear god to show you love him. Hahaha

Of course one is free to believe anything they want and yes the brain is something that scientists are just beginning to explore, but history has shown us that the more we discover, the less we need a "god" to explain. The thing is that by simply using the extensive research on traumatic brain injuries (There are many other examples) science has shown that a person's, skills, attitude, preferences, interests, tastes,morals religious beliefs (for and against) etc , etc, etc,etc,.,(so everything we would consider a soul) can drastically change based solely on physical damage to the organ, but if none of these fit your definition of a soul , I invite you to clarify

I always find it amusing when the magats cry about the MSM being in the Dems pocket (though there is a small amount of truth in that) and in the same breath will put Musk, the man that owns arguably the most influential social media site in the world and has openly endorsed Trump on some sort of pedestal. Today's word boys and girls is hypocrisy

Neuroscience has pretty much determined that the soul is nothing more than a religious construct and is not tied to reality

Why does anyone care about Jordan Peterson. He hasn't said anything of substance since, clean your room

Says the heathen

So, because that's not how you interpret it, it's not satire? Oh , you must have read it in the original Italian? Or maybe you have a degree in Renaissance writing. I wish I could remember the book I read that in, it was a very interesting view of Machiavelli's writings. It spoke of his exile and how it jaded him. The premise of what the author was saying is he was so disenfranchised he pushed what he thought was the hypocrisy of the ruling class to it's natural progression

Honestly, I think it's an act. I can't see how anyone with that kind of flawed logic could even work a computer, no less manage to be a productive member of society.

There are a lot of slimey dishonest politicians that I can understand the low information voters fall for (ted Cruz comes to mind) but I never understood what people see in Trump. When he first announced he was running, I'll admit I thought it could be an interesting idea, A successful business man running a country that functions essentially like a corporation sounded good, now that's because I believed the Myth that Donald Trump was able to create for himself ( if nothing else, the man is a brilliant self promotor, shameless but brilliant) Then I took the time to read about him, turns out he's not a good business man, in reality his daddy bought him some buildings in new York at a time that the real estate market was low because downtown was pretty run down. Then Rudy came in ( before he went crazy) cleaned it up and property values went up. So nothing he did. Other than that it was just a string of failures, with multiple bankruptcies, including a casino, he bankrupted a casino. The only successful thing he's ever done on his own is, playing a business man on a scripted T.V show. Not to mention the complete lack of policy prescriptions even on the things he's been running on for 10 years. The perfect example after claiming it would be easy to replace Obama care with something cheaper and better, he still only has the concept of a plan. I guess ignorance love company

Seriously, do you think taxme is really that dumb or just a master troll?

Is this not the perfect example of the polarization we face today, particularly in the US. The right says "angry black women" The left says "bias Fox host tries to bully VP" When the truth lies somewhere in the middle. You should all be ashamed of yourselves.

For some people educated females are probably a problem, only the ignorant ones will even give them a look. They'll still never get laid, but at least they have a fighting chance

The irony of you calling me (or anyone else for that matter) a bigot, is almost unquantifiable. I was a Christian for many years, and by the time I was 12 had forgotten more about the Bible then you have, or will ever learn. Be gone demon, you are of the devil. Satan is your father

No, no, maybe you didn't understand, I'm talking about what the Bible actually says. Of course I don't know how the specific charlatans, you listen to, manipulate the Bible to con simpletons like you, or the specifics of how and what parts of the Bible they intentionally misrepresent, but I know it's not in the spirit of the teachings of Jesus. Because you are a heretic.

Money says, I not only know the Bible more than you, but the history of christianity in general well above your understanding. Quick question are you a king James only person?

It's a joke, numbskull I don't believe in the God of the Bible, ergo I don't think anyone is going to heaven. But you do , so you should repent quickly, You sir are of the devil and though you like to pretend to spread the "good news", in reality every time you invoke the "word of God" it is just blasphemy. Therefore, based on the book you so readily bring up (well misrepresent) Jesus WILL say to you "You never knew me"

Though some of the points you raised are valid and merit further discussion, they are not relevant to the issue of the current conversation. This conversation dealt with the original comment I made saying that Canada has "arguably" more freedom. Nationalist, disagreed with my hypothesis, I mentioned the heritage foundation/ Frasier institute paper about financial mobility. He had no answer. In fact his only counter points dealt with property rights (something I didn't dispute, but don't actually feel is a valid point, as a home owner, I didn't even spend a millisecond worrying if the government was going to take my house and can't imagine that many Canadians feel any different) and access to guns (another point I readily coincide) This is where you interjected. I was speaking about the trade off, that this supposed freedom would entail. Of course I'm not arguing a direct causel link between gun ownership and homicide rates, because no logically minded rational person would ever do that, but at the same time I'm sure you would admit that claiming that there is no correlation would be just as errant. It's not just a simple matter of more guns, more death, but the gun culture in the US and I used the example of stand your ground laws as an illustration. I also provided numbers (that are unbiased) that compare Canada and the US directly and support my assertions. If you have numbers that contradict those, I'd be happy to see them but simply stating your opinions makes for a less than fruitful conversation I have never been in a situation where I think I could have better handled it, if I had a firearm, and I'm a foster kid from Regent Park. Have you ever felt your freedoms were suppressed by the fact you can't carry a gun?

I wonder what irrelevant Bible verses you'll quote during judgement, because you will need to defend yourself, as Matthew 7:21-23 is your future. Well it would be if the nonsense YOU (and I specify you, because you, are a terrible example of walking with Christ) believe were true, but it's not. Funniest part is that, if the God of the Bible were real, I have a better chance of getting into heaven than you do. Even as a non believer my secular humanist values are more in line with the teachings of Jesus than any of the pseudo religious gibberish that you spout. All you do is warp the Bible to fit your (well the idiōt "pastors that tell you what to think) preconceived ideas. You sir are a heretic