Maybe difficult but not impossible or even nearly impossible. The first step is to recognize your biases. Then you can take them into account and go from there. I dislike Trump and his loyalists immensely. That's a bias. In this case, it doesn't color my view of Vance's change. It's about as...
Having enlarged NATO =\= ruling the world.
There was no need for Putin to stop NATO.
NATO wants Ukraine to stay a sovereign country, just as Ukraine does.
Putin is only proving exactly why Ukraine wants to join NATO. "Oh, you want to join an alliance in order to protect yourself from me...
You said this before, and it's still false. Only a cynically anti-NATO bias would cause these claims. There's absolutely nothing to show that NATO doesn't want Ukraine to win or that they want "to bleed Russia" or that they want the war to continue as long as possible.
That is not the plan...
What the world is is reducible to simple facts. Why we are here is a philosophical question that implies a creator, and so automatically assumes a god already and isn't useful. Who we are is humans.
Philosophy approaches questions like this in a way that's not indoctrination. You can learn how...
Indoctrination:
the process of teaching a person or group to accept a set of beliefs uncritically.
That's negative. Teaching should involve imparting knowledge in a way that helps the person understand it and not just accept it uncritically. For instance, when you're taught about...
Let's recap again.
Me: The entire point of the question is that women are so wary of men because of all those bad experiences they have with them.
You: I never said they weren't.
Yet here you are saying they weren't.
This is about the bear question. It's frankly really weird that you keep...
Yes, significantly so. The whole point of NATO not being directly involved is to not escalate things (and that Ukraine isn't part of NATO). If NATO was directly involved and fighting Russia, the invasion likely wouldn't have lasted long, and Russia would have been defeated after maybe a few...
Uh, yeah. Women chose the bear, so the OP takes that to mean women hate men. So, then we point out how wrong that is by pointing out why they actually chose the bear. And you now acknowledge that our explanation is correct.
Exactly. And now you changed your tune and are agreeing with us, except...
No, I keep asserting facts. The definition is the only evidence needed, and that has been provided. So, you'll have to come up with a little more than "nuh uh" to try to counter the fact that the actual definition of the word proves you wrong.
So, again, to recap:
This thread is about the question about the bear. There was an assertion that women choosing the bear are bigoted.
And then you claimed women are bigoted for choosing the bear.
Soooooo...it's exactly what I said. It's a thread about the question regarding the bear. I...
It's not wasted if you learned something. You learned that your indoctrination is responsible for your belief in Christianity, so I'd say it was worth it.
I guess this is the part where you realize you have no actual counterarguments, so you resort to "Nuh uh!". The bottom line is an atheist by definition does not believe in God. If you have something more than "nuh uh!", feel free to reply. Otherwise, maybe don't.
Sure, that's not uncommon, but it doesn't change anything. You categorized that life-altering experience based on the religious frame you had. Someone else with a different frame would categorize it differently. For instance, that Muslim would have the same experience but frame it within Islam...
Uh...what? This thread is about women choosing the bear. This is the thread where we've discussed this. I haven't been part of another thread on this topic.
Right, you're desperately attempting to nitpick instead of just have an honest conversation. "You said every day, but it's only 25 days a...