Hello and my, what an interesting forum title!

[Valyza1]

Hi all!  Technically, I've posted in this forum before, but never formally said hi in this thread.  My screen name sounds female-ish, but I'm actually male. 

I think secular discussions about God are utterly fascinating and I'm glad this forum exists.  Some of my most prolific friendships in real life are with secularists, rationalists and atheists, but there rarely seems to be occasion to broach the subject.  It happens to be their stated position on the topic, but we tend to get into non-related discussions more often than not. 

The forum title fascinates me because the question itself is so layered and doesn't seem to lend itself to a binary yes/no answer, at least to me.  I hope to participate in some illuminating discussions in the forum at some point.  My philosophy on having discussions is mainly to take the steal man approach in the hopes that the best lights of various points of view can be given the weight they deserve.  It is tempting, especially online, to take an adversarial position and focus on pointing out the other person's flaws.  I don't, however, believe this is necessary or helpful.  Should flaws be shown up?  Yes, but I don't think that's the job of someone else in a discussion.  Rather, if questions are asked in place of criticism, than both participants have the opportunity to learn and grow and see their *own* flaws.  It's taken me a bit of time to realize this, but *everyone's* thinking is flawed. 

Hope to talk with you all soon!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Case]

Welcome to the forum.

[none]

yeah vasil. everbody gets along so don't rock the boat

[Valyza1]

If I'm treated with respect, I will treat with respect in return.  If I'm treated with disrespect, I will still try my best to treat with respect, because to me, being disrespectful is to be blind to the other person's value and blindness is a disability, and I try to be kind to the disabled. 

[none]

what are you interests instead of trying to be a shrink?

[Valyza1]

Pretending to be a shrink, fantasizing about being a shrink and photobombing psychiatric hospital staff group photos. 

[Valyza1]

Also, I like theatre, improv and chess


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[none]

Also, I like theatre, improv and chess


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

start a secular discussion about god

[Valyza1]

I will probably do that at some point. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mr. Blackwell]

Hi.


Welcome to the forum...again.












Well, guess we'll see you in a couple years! In the meantime please enjoy this +1

[none]

I will probably do that at some point. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

i doubt it

[Valyza1]

I will probably do that at some point. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

i doubt it

Why's that?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[none]

I will probably do that at some point. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

i doubt it

Why's that?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

are you secular?

[Valyza1]

Not 100% secular, if that's what you mean, but I have a secular side.  Most of my discussions are secular in nature. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Valyza1]

Would you consider a discussion about the meaning
of the word "God" to be a secular discussion about God?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[none]

Would you consider a discussion about the meaning
of the word "God" to be a secular discussion about God?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

f**k if I know , I'm not supposed to argue in the intro thread

[Valyza1]

Would you consider a discussion about the meaning
of the word "God" to be a secular discussion about God?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

f**k if I know , I'm not supposed to argue in the intro thread

Then don't


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[none]

Would you consider a discussion about the meaning
of the word "God" to be a secular discussion about God?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

f**k if I know , I'm not supposed to argue in the intro thread

Then don't


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

i am right, correct in my assessment

[ak.yonathan]

Hello Valyza1, I like chess too. If playing as white I will usually opt for the Queen's Gambit, and if I'm black and my opponent plays e4 I will try the Caro-kann or the Marshall Gambit from the Ruy Lopez, if s/he plays d4 I will play the Nimzo-Indian defense.

Sent from my RMX1805 using Tapatalk

[Valyza1]

Hello Valyza1, I like chess too. If playing as white I will usually opt for the Queen's Gambit, and if I'm black and my opponent plays e4 I will try the Caro-kann or the Marshall Gambit from the Ruy Lopez, if s/he plays d4 I will play the Nimzo-Indian defense.

Sent from my RMX1805 using Tapatalk

Cool.  I'm not as familiar with the names of the openings, but my default opening move is d4 for white and d5 for black


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ak.yonathan]

I think that objectively d4 is the best move for white however playing d5 after white has played d4 himself could lead into the Queen's Gambit, an opening I'm fond of as I stated previously due to it allowing white center control and rapid development. In that situation I would think your best bet is to try a Slav defense (playing pawn to c6). If white plays e4 then it could lead to a Scandinavian defense which I don't like as it violates an opening principle, which is don't bring your queen out too early.

Sent from my RMX1805 using Tapatalk

[Valyza1]

So far, the only principles I've been able to make use of are basic principles for every move (look at the whole board, decide why you think your opponent just moved the way he/she did, ask want to want to achieve offensively, list your options based on the answers to the previous questions and select the best option among them) and principles based on the stage of the game you're in: for opening, develop your pieces as quickly as possible, for middle game, break down your opponent's defenses and for ending, reduce your opponent's king's legal
options to nothing while checking to make sure it isn't a stalemate or else find configurations that could most easily lead to stalemate if you are too much of an underdog to reasonably expect a win. 

Have you ever been in a situation where you're an underdog and you see a move that will guarantee a stalemate, but you haven't ruled out a win yet and have to decide between playing it safe and stalemating or going for the win, even though it will mean risking a loss?  I don't really have an example on hand, it's just an interesting choice to me

[ak.yonathan]

Can't remember ever being in such a situation but usually if my opponent offers a draw I'll take it unless my position is absolutely crushing.

Sent from my RMX1805 using Tapatalk

[Valyza1]

That's interesting.  I rarely get offered a draw unless it's clear we're in a definitely or likely "washing machine" situation (repeating the same moves over and over ad infinitum).   

I tend to disregard the point system, though I could see myself caring more about a rating if I was trying to earning money in tournaments or something.  At the moment, I play for the enjoyment of it, so there is less of a tendency to avoid the risk of a loss. 

That being said, the desire to minimize my loss is still strong, so I'm often consciously having to push myself to take more risks.  I think my threshold for deciding that a situation is not worth attempting a win is being pushed further and further out.

[Dexter]

Welcome Valyza1. +1 for taking a steal man approach.

As an aside, your approach is very similar to Shakaib who we have not heard from in a while.

[Valyza1]

Welcome Valyza1. +1 for taking a steal man approach.

As an aside, your approach is very similar to Shakaib who we have not heard from in a while.

I find that my frequency of posting in these kinds of forums is proportional to my need to express something I can't express or can rarely express outside of them.  Steal manning in particular can lead to a realization of how lacking in urgency the communication of some thoughts actually are.  I've never read any posts by Shakaib, but I am not surprised that a steal manner has probably taken time off to reflect or focus on more important things. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Inertialmass]

take the steal man approach in the hopes that the best lights of various points of view

a steal man approach

WTF?

Which man are all y'all christers gonna burgle? 

We're not supposed to debate theology in this board but I gotta take philosophical issue with advocating the theft of some inchoate "man," Val and Dexter.

[Valyza1]

Which man are all y'all christers gonna burgle?  .

Haha!  SteEl


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Inertialmass]

As in, "I'm gonna take the Superman approach to Internet Forum interaction..." 

Never mind.  I thought maybe it was obscure christian code between you and Dexter, or maybe coded Aussie speak.  I'll stay out of this thread now.

[AgnosticDamien]