Alisa is right that an existential sentence is in principle easier to prove than its negative. Just produce a specimen. I bet she filched it from Karl Popper. The negation takes another universal premise to prove it from. But God is a harder nut. If God supporters could produce the specimen, they'd still need to prove uniqueness and the requisite universal properties. God opposers try to argue they do not need that hypothesis. Thing is the supporters clearly feel that need. It's not logic, it's a eusocial insect's builtin circuit. Less stupid egomaniacs are aware of its usefulness as a mind numbing anesthesiac, opium for the masses. Fiction or fact, its a great hypothesis. It would deserve inventing if it did not come pre-installed. Alisa was a silly hag.
ellauri184.html on line 642: By deriving his superior authority directly from God (e.g., in exorcisms and forgiveness of sins: Lk. 7.47-50) through his unique proximity to God and his ultimate claim to his unique interpretation of divine law – he exclusively set his own standards and his own criteria of who had access to Heaven and who did not – he upset the masses and caught the attention of the authorities, who perceived such utterances as subversive. More and more, they felt threatened in their own authority. In addition to behaving as though bestowed with superior authority, Jesus sharply criticized the Temple to the point that he finally became violent within its precincts. After a final incident, the representatives of the Temple, the priests, the scribes, and the Elders, who strove to preserve the core of the Jewish faith as embodied in the Temple, felt threatened in their position.
ellauri236.html on line 204: In borrowing from William Faulkner's Sanctuary, Chase only took the plot; the mental atmosphere of the two books is not similar. Chase really derives from other sources, and this particular bit of borrowing is only symbolic. What it symbolizes is the vulgarization of ideas which is constantly happening, and which probably happens faster in an age of print. Chase has been described as ‘Faulkner for the masses’, but it would be more accurate to describe him as Carlyle for the masses. He is a popular writer — there are many such in America, but they are still rarities in England — who has caught up with what is now fashionable to call ‘realism’, meaning the doctrine that might is right. The growth of ‘realism’ has been the great feature of the intellectual history of our own age. Why this should be so is a complicated question. The interconnexion between sadism, masochism, success-worship, power-worship, nationalism, and totalitarianism is a huge subject whose edges have barely been scratched, and even to mention it is considered somewhat indelicate. To take merely the first example that comes to mind, I believe no one has ever pointed out the sadistic and masochistic element in Bernard Shaw's work, still less suggested that this probably has some connexion with Shaw's admiration for dictators. Fascism is often loosely equated with sadism, but nearly always by people who see nothing wrong in the most slavish worship of Stalin. The truth is, of course, that the countless English intellectuals who kiss the arse of Stalin are not different from the minority who give their allegiance to Hitler or Mussolini, nor from the efficiency experts who preached ‘punch’, ‘drive’, ‘personality’ and ‘learn to be a Tiger man’ in the nineteen-twenties, nor from that older generation of intellectuals, Carlyle, Creasey and the rest of them, who bowed down before German militarism. All of them are worshipping power and successful cruelty. It is important to notice that the cult of power tends to be mixed up with a love of cruelty and wickedness for their own sakes. A tyrant is all the more admired if he happens to be a bloodstained crook as well, and ‘the end justifies the means’ often becomes, in effect, ‘the means justify themselves provided they are dirty enough’. This idea colours the outlook of all sympathizers with totalitarianism, and accounts, for instance, for the positive delight with which many English intellectuals greeted the Nazi-Soviet pact. It was a step only doubtfully useful to the U.S.S.R., but it was entirely unmoral, and for that reason to be admired; the explanations of it, which were numerous and self-contradictory, could come afterwards.
ellauri257.html on line 489: Singer described himself as "conservative," adding that "I don't believe by flattering the masses all the time we really achieve much." His conservative side was most apparent in his Yiddish writing and journalism, where he was openly hostile to Marxist sociopolitical agendas. In Forverts he once wrote, "It may seem like terrible apikorses [heresy], but conservative governments in America, England, France, have handled Jews no worse than liberal governments.... The Jew's worst enemies were always those elements that the modern Jew convinced himself (really hypnotized himself) were his friends. Interestingly enough, he notes the cultural tensions between Sephardic and Ashkenazi Jewish people during his trip to Haifa and during his stay in the new nation. With the description of Jewish immigration camps in the new land, he foresaw the difficulties and socio-economic tensions in Israel, and hence turned back to his critical views of Zionism. Naah, America is the promised land.
ellauri260.html on line 231: German philosophy did a great deal by way of deepening the ideas of men. In particular its starting from the whole instead of the individual, and its idea of movement advancing in virtue of its own forces, had a great influence on every section of social life. But the economic problem, and on this account the general social movement was directed by Lassalle, and still more by Marx, into far too narrow a path, and the Socialist ideal was conceived in too partisan a sense. The chief aim was to bring about a collective ownership of the means of production and " socialise " all property, and to recognise in the class-war a lever for the over- throw of the existing political conditions. It was thus that the Socialist movement captured the thoughts and sentiments of great masses of people.
ellauri324.html on line 246: There will then be a chip that can do everything i mentioned before however this will be implanted within you and the idea will be that its safe secure trendy and it makes you like a GOD! celebrities professors of high institutions law enforcement CEOS etc will all have this making it more intriguing to the masses. In a short amount of time this will edge out physical currency however people will have an option. When enough people have accepted this IT WILL BECOME MANDATORY YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO BUY OR SELL, TRAVEL OR WORK, TAKE THE BUS THE TRAIN EAT AT RESTAURANTS OR EVEN APPLY TO SCHOOLS OR WORK JOBS. Within your schools and hospitals and workplaces your bosses and teachers will make this mandatory and you will have to comply before you end up in jail or confinement. At this point you will have to either leave and take up whatever supplies you have or join people who are like minded in not conforming to the technological abomination. People at this time will be very sick and people in America have been getting more sick with food pollution stress fatigue etc they will rely on the system for their medication with heart and organ failures depression and psychosis tumors and boils that will seem to have no cure. People who rely on the system will have a harder time withdrawing from it. Addictions food intolerances vaccine epidemics and malnutrition exhaustion fatigue depression and violence will be on the rise to a point where they could and want to call for martial law.
ellauri370.html on line 151: G) In the 1970's, masses of American Jews protested publically for Soviet Jews. 150,000 Soviet Jewish activists were able to emigrate to Israel thru American intervention. God bless Skip Jackson!
xxx/ellauri120.html on line 80: The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in a democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, and our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of…It is they who pull the wires that control the public mind. (Lähde: Bernays; Propaganda)
xxx/ellauri250.html on line 164: This is not a movie for the masses. It is, however, a small film about real life hardships and their tragic consequences. While the dialogue and careful pacing befits the original novel, the film sometimes drags because of it. Towne has not given us the great American love story, but he has presented us with a captivating view of 1933 Los Angeles and a tale of romance that involves us in the plight of the characters.
12