Playfulness Indicates More Romantic Partners

[RAMOSS]

Religion's role involves influencing the spirit of the law when it comes to prioritizing which interpretation of words deserves to come first.

I would like to see you support that statement.

 

[XDU]

I would like to see you support that statement.

You would agree that Dominicans, Franciscans, Carmelites, Bendictines, Augustinians, Cistercians, Carthusians, Jesuits, Presbyterians, Lutherans, Methodists, Baptists, Pentecostals, Episcopalians, Mormons, and Quakers all believe in the same Christian framework, but the way they believe in it is different, correct?

All of these groups coexist among one another under the same letter of the law. The way they believe the letter ought to be interpreted by the spirit determines how the law is administered among them.

 

[RAMOSS]

You would agree that Dominicans, Franciscans, Carmelites, Bendictines, Augustinians, Cistercians, Carthusians, Jesuits, Presbyterians, Lutherans, Methodists, Baptists, Pentecostals, Episcopalians, Mormons, and Quakers all believe in the same Christian framework, but the way they believe in it is different, correct?

All of these groups coexist among one another under the same letter of the law. The way they believe the letter ought to be interpreted by the spirit determines how the law is administered among them.

How does that matter at all? Our laws and understanding came from the secular Greeks.

 

[XDU]

How does that matter at all? Our laws and understanding came from the secular Greeks.

...because we don't live in ancient Greece. We live after the Greek world was evangelized by Paul and his companions.

We live after the Maccabean Revolt and after the Alexandrian riots.

We live after Alexander the Great started the Hellenization process which sparked the rivalry between the Sadducees and Pharisees.

All the same, we live after the Macedonian Renaissance and especially after the Tusculan Papacy when the Theophylacti family failed to hold onto things as proven by how their corruption was cleaned up by the Gregorian Reforms.

I say all of this especially as it pertains to this thread.

Nobody knows the difference between agape, eros, pragma, storge, ludus, philia, mania, and philautia anymore...

...so for all the benefits of social progress, we have admittedly forgotten some words that matter.

 

[RAMOSS]

...because we don't live in ancient Greece. We live after the Greek world was evangelized by Paul and his companions.

We live after the Maccabean Revolt and after the Alexandrian riots.

We live after Alexander the Great started the Hellenization process which sparked the rivalry between the Sadducees and Pharisees.

All the same, we live after the Macedonian Renaissance and especially after the Tusculan Papacy when the Theophylacti family failed to hold onto things as proven by how their corruption was cleaned up by the Gregorian Reforms.

I say all of this especially as it pertains to this thread.

Nobody knows the difference between agape, eros, pragma, storge, ludus, philia, mania, and philautia anymore...

...so for all the benefits of social progress, we have admittedly forgotten some words that matter.

No, we don't. However, many of the founding fathers were influenced by Greek philosophy combined with the 'age of enligtenment'. The influences came from the Greeks, modified by the 'age of enlightenment' philosophies of the late 18th and early 19th centuries. No religion was needed for that.

 

[Lursa]

No, we don't. However, many of the founding fathers were influenced by Greek philosophy combined with the 'age of enligtenment'. The influences came from the Greeks, modified by the 'age of enlightenment' philosophies of the late 18th and early 19th centuries. No religion was needed for that.

His post reminded me of one of my favorite quotes from Steel Magnolias, "An ounce of pretention is worth a pound of manure."

 

[XDU]

No, we don't. However, many of the founding fathers were influenced by Greek philosophy combined with the 'age of enligtenment'. The influences came from the Greeks, modified by the 'age of enlightenment' philosophies of the late 18th and early 19th centuries. No religion was needed for that.

The age of enlightenment failed to address the subrational nature of humanity. It was overtaken by romanticism.

 

[RAMOSS]

The age of enlightenment failed to address the subrational nature of humanity. It was overtaken by romanticism.

Now, if you can only support your opinion. That would be something.

 

[XDU]

Now, if you can only support your opinion. That would be something.

It's just common history. Anyone can look up the age of enlightenment and romantic era to see how the first was replaced by the second.

 

[RAMOSS]

It's just common history. Anyone can look up the age of enlightenment and romantic era to see how the first was replaced by the second.

Isn't it nice you support your claim with 'it's just common history'. If it was so common, you would have made a point. There is also the issue of interpretation of how things effected each other, and historians DO disagree with each other.

I do know, for example, Jefferson did an editing of the bible to get rid of the supernatural items. That made things very secular.

 

[Irredentist]

Playful adults have more romantic partners, study finds

Playfulness is associated with having a higher number of short-term and long-term relationships, according to new research published in Evolutionary Human Sciences.

www.psypost.org

Not much of a surprise, but it does formalize the idea behind how conservative discipline is monogamous while liberal happiness is polygamous.

There is a lot of evidence to suggest that humans are not naturally monogamous animals, and that emphasis on strict monogamy is largely a cultural phenomenon rather than a biological one. Certainly there are many cultures which do not practice strict monogamy, as much for economic reasons as for romantic or sexual ones.

 

[Irredentist]

I'm implying in reality, happiness doesn't grow on trees. You don't need a source for that.

Happiness can look a great deal different for different people.

 

[XDU]

Isn't it nice you support your claim with 'it's just common history'. If it was so common, you would have made a point. There is also the issue of interpretation of how things effected each other, and historians DO disagree with each other.

I do know, for example, Jefferson did an editing of the bible to get rid of the supernatural items. That made things very secular.

I say it's common history because it's what we learned growing up in school in 10th grade.

If you don't know that, then I don't know how you passed. Sorry, but I don't have my 10th grade history textbook any longer.

 

[RAMOSS]

I say it's common history because it's what we learned growing up in school in 10th grade.

If you don't know that, then I don't know how you passed. Sorry, but I don't have my 10th grade history textbook any longer.

Ah, insults instead of actually supporting your claims. That indicates to me that the claims are false.

 

[XDU]

Ah, insults instead of actually supporting your claims. That indicates to me that the claims are false.

Understanding how public education works isn't an insult.

 

[RAMOSS]

Understanding how public education works isn't an insult.

I am sorry you are unable to acutally back up your claims, and have to resort to diversionary tactics.

 

[Lisa]

The age of enlightenment failed to address the subrational nature of humanity. It was overtaken by romanticism.

What exactly is this subrational nature of humanity? You like to use these words that I am not convinced that you understand.

Understanding how public education works isn't an insult.

Please explain how the public education system works if you believe that you are so well informed and others are not. This seems to be a religious dog whistle because the public education system refuses to teach your preferred religious dogma.


To the OP; Should we be surprised that people who are flirtatious have more romantic partners? That seems to be the expected cause and effect.

 

[XDU]

What exactly is this subrational nature of humanity? You like to use these words that I am not convinced that you understand.


Please explain how the public education system works if you believe that you are so well informed and others are not. This seems to be a religious dog whistle because the public education system refuses to teach your preferred religious dogma.


To the OP; Should we be surprised that people who are flirtatious have more romantic partners? That seems to be the expected cause and effect.

Subrationality is when people are partially rational, partially not. Sometimes we think clearly. Other times, we get stimulated to the point of distraction or overwhelmed since our minds are only so big and can't organize information indefinitely.

The public education system follows the Progressive Social Gospel. This isn't a matter of preference. It's a matter of how the Social Gospel itself is based on preference since it comes from the Third Great Awakening and the Calvinist doctrine therein which plays favorites over judging good works as a sign of who's already saved.

Obviously, that's true about romantic partners, but some people deny the obvious and want empirical evidence for everything.

 

[XDU]

I am sorry you are unable to acutally back up your claims, and have to resort to diversionary tactics.

The claim is backed up by default of going through school. If you failed public education, that's not my burden to compensate.

 

[RAMOSS]

The claim is backed up by default of going through school. If you failed public education, that's not my burden to compensate.

More diversiary tactics with yet another unsupported claim.

 

[XDU]

More diversiary tactics with yet another unsupported claim.

Not at all.

What's diversionary is not acknowledging the givens we're allowed to work with from safely assuming people graduated from public education.

It's not my burden to be your teacher.

 

[RAMOSS]

Not at all.

What's diversionary is not acknowledging the givens we're allowed to work with from safely assuming people graduated from public education.

It's not my burden to be your teacher.

However, if you want crediblity, it is your burden to support your claims. However, that is only if you want people to take you seriously.

 

[XDU]

However, if you want crediblity, it is your burden to support your claims. However, that is only if you want people to take you seriously.

Serious credibility starts with being a mature adult who acknowledges the basics of public education curriculum.

 

[RAMOSS]

Serious credibility starts with being a mature adult who acknowledges the basics of public education curriculum.

Part of the public education curriculum has been 'showing your work'. And 'supporting your work with sources'. You don't, therefore your thesis fails.

 

[Lursa]

Serious credibility starts with being a mature adult who acknowledges the basics of public education curriculum.

Meaningless non-committal non-answer after non-answer.