My response to Walkstall's comment

[walkstall]

In response to you and Solar. So now, 50 years later, look at the condition of our schools and what they are producing. I remember in grammar school my biggest fear was not getting promoted. I recall one kid in a class that did not get promoted. That was quite a motivator to me. Now kids are just "moved along" so as to not hurt their ego. BS!

I was one of those kids that did not get promoted in the first grade.  Even in sight reading.   That's why my three kids attended private school after the first grade.  They were going to get the best schooling we could give them. 

[supsalemgr]

I was one of those kids that did not get promoted in the first grade.  Even in sight reading.   That's why my three kids attended private school after the first grade.  They were going to get the best schooling we could give them.

Preaching to choir on the subject and value of private school.

[walkstall]

Preaching to choir on the subject and value of private school.

I hope the libs can learn from us.  The BS that's going on in the public schools in this day and age.   Before it's too late, at least I was not brain washed.

[cubedemon]

It is very interesting to state that "With God, All things are possible."    I would like you all to look at that phrase carefully as I dissect it into two parts.   The two parts are "With God" and "All things are possible."   The first part, "With God", is a constraint.   A constraint means that a statement can't hold up unless a conditional is met.   In other words, All things are possible is constrained only by God permitting it or allowing it to be so. 

Conditional Statement:  If God permits x, then x is possible.

Statement 2:   God permits x

Conclusion: X is possible.

This is what in formal logic is called modus ponens.   

Let's obtain the modus tollens of this.

We have the conditional statement which again says If God permits x, then x is possible.

Statement 2:   x is not possible.

Conclusion:   God did not permit x.

You all were able to work things out for yourselves when finding and keeping a job because God permitted you to do so. God gave you all what he thought you all should have through his divine, perfect, permissible and ultimate will.  He had and still has a purpose for everyone of you.   As I went to service, listened to what a man of God had to say, asked my questions of other Christains, reflected, washed, rinsed and repeated what God wants is to not do what you all did and do this whole figure it out yourself pull yourself by your own bootstraps thing.  God permitted this for you.   What God wants for me is to get my own thinking, my own self, and my own ego out of the way.   Solar, even you said to think outside the box and you're right.   I must think outside the box, my own box, my own thoughts, my own head and my own ego.  This means I have to submit myself to others and to God as well.   They have access to perceptions that is blind to me.  Should the blind lead the blind and should a fool lead a fool?   I am but blind to my own foolish machinations caused by my very processes.   These things got me into my own problems.   God does not permit me to use my own thoughts to pull myself up without the help and guidance of others through the father, the son and the holy spirit.  To do so would be to sin which means to disobey.  I thought I could work things out for myself and work outside the bounds of God when I'm but a foolish man with an Autism Spectrum Disorder accompanied by a social pragmatic disorder as well as Kroz said.  She is a testimonial as to what I am saying because she taught me a valuable lesson which was we can only prove or disprove only within the constructs of what we're permitted to understand by God's holy and divine providence.   So, what God permit is possible for me and everyone else and what is not possible for me and others is not what God permitted. 

[Solar]

It is very interesting to state that "With God, All things are possible."    I would like you all to look at that phrase carefully as I dissect it into two parts.   The two parts are "With God" and "All things are possible."   The first part, "With God", is a constraint.   A constraint means that a statement can't hold up unless a conditional is met.   In other words, All things are possible is constrained only by God permitting it or allowing it to be so. 

Conditional Statement:  If God permits x, then x is possible.

Statement 2:   God permits x

Conclusion: X is possible.

This is what in formal logic is called modus ponens.   

Let's obtain the modus tollens of this.

We have the conditional statement which again says If God permits x, then x is possible.

Statement 2:   x is not possible.

Conclusion:   God did not permit x.

You all were able to work things out for yourselves when finding and keeping a job because God permitted you to do so. God gave you all what he thought you all should have through his divine, perfect, permissible and ultimate will.  He had and still has a purpose for everyone of you.   As I went to service, listened to what a man of God had to say, asked my questions of other Christains, reflected, washed, rinsed and repeated what God wants is to not do what you all did and do this whole figure it out yourself pull yourself by your own bootstraps thing.  God permitted this for you.   What God wants for me is to get my own thinking, my own self, and my own ego out of the way.   Solar, even you said to think outside the box and you're right.   I must think outside the box, my own box, my own thoughts, my own head and my own ego.  This means I have to submit myself to others and to God as well.   They have access to perceptions that is blind to me.  Should the blind lead the blind and should a fool lead a fool?   I am but blind to my own foolish machinations caused by my very processes.   These things got me into my own problems.   God does not permit me to use my own thoughts to pull myself up without the help and guidance of others through the father, the son and the holy spirit.  To do so would be to sin which means to disobey.  I thought I could work things out for myself and work outside the bounds of God when I'm but a foolish man with an Autism Spectrum Disorder accompanied by a social pragmatic disorder as well as Kroz said.  She is a testimonial as to what I am saying because she taught me a valuable lesson which was we can only prove or disprove only within the constructs of what we're permitted to understand by God's holy and divine providence.   So, what God permit is possible for me and everyone else and what is not possible for me and others is not what God permitted.

All based on a false premise.
God granted us free will.

[cubedemon]

All based on a false premise.
God granted us free will.

True, God did give us free will.   It is true that we do have the capacity to go against God and his word.   We do have the free will to choose obedience and disobedience.   It is possible for one to pursue x because God permits us by giving us free will to do so.  There have been many people who thought they could become God, the alpha and omega, throughout human history.   Has anyone ever truthfully succeeded?   Even Julius Ceasar thought he could become greater than the North Star itself.  The North Star isn't God but the idea is similar.   What was his outcome in the end?  What has been to consequences to this type of thinking that we could become God or gods?  Have anyone ever had success with this endeavor?

We can choose to pursue things but can we ever choose the consequence and outcome of what we choose to pursue?  If yes, what is the extent of the choice to the consequences of what we all choose to do?  Do we have a bound and constraint to free will itself?   If yes, what are our bounds?  Is free will absolute and boundless?

Just because we have the free will to do x  like sin does this mean we should do it if God allows us to do so yet tells us not to or he says we're not to do so?

condition 1.  Do we have free will with boundaries that it is not possible for man to cross?

condition 2.  Do we have free will with unlimited boundaries?

condition 3.  Do we have free will that God allows us to do actions and makes it possible for us to do actions but has said "no, don't do this?"   

Is (condition 3 true in addition to condition 1 being true which means condition 2 is false) or is (condition 3 true in addition to condition 2 being true  which means condition 1 is false)?

[Solar]

True, God did give us free will.   It is true that we do have the capacity to go against God and his word.   We do have the free will to choose obedience and disobedience.   It is possible for one to pursue x because God permits us by giving us free will to do so.  There have been many people who thought they could become God, the alpha and omega, throughout human history.   Has anyone ever truthfully succeeded?   Even Julius Ceasar thought he could become greater than the North Star itself.  The North Star isn't God but the idea is similar.   What was his outcome in the end?  What has been to consequences to this type of thinking that we could become God or gods?  Have anyone ever had success with this endeavor?

We can choose to pursue things but can we ever choose the consequence and outcome of what we choose to pursue?  If yes, what is the extent of the choice to the consequences of what we all choose to do?  Do we have a bound and constraint to free will itself?   If yes, what are our bounds?  Is free will absolute and boundless?

Just because we have the free will to do x  like sin does this mean we should do it if God allows us to do so yet tells us not to or he says we're not to do so?

condition 1.  Do we have free will with boundaries that it is not possible for man to cross?

condition 2.  Do we have free will with unlimited boundaries?

condition 3.  Do we have free will that God allows us to do actions and makes it possible for us to do actions but has said "no, don't do this?"   

Is (condition 3 true in addition to condition 1 being true which means condition 2 is false) or is (condition 3 true in addition to condition 2 being true  which means condition 1 is false)?

How would you know if God inhibited free will, does he slip you a note stating so, tap you on the shoulder, smack you upside the head, or simply end your life so you can't proceed?

Take Hiroshima, Nagasaki, horrible loss of life, yet God did not intervene.
Man cannot fly, yet we made it to the moon.

Do you ever ask yourself questions before posing them to others first?

[cubedemon]

How would you know if God inhibited free will, does he slip you a note stating so, tap you on the shoulder, smack you upside the head, or simply end your life so you can't proceed?

Answer:  No one has ever been able to become him as far as I know.   Anyone who has tried seems to fall.

Take Hiroshima, Nagasaki, horrible loss of life, yet God did not intervene.

True

Man cannot fly, yet we made it to the moon.

True, we have indeed!   

Do you ever ask yourself questions before posing them to others first?

Yes, but to get to a fuller view of truth and reality of things I need to be able to go outside of myself.   My view is incomplete and since my view is incomplete the conclusions I will draw more than likely will be incomplete as well.   

How do I explain this to you?   So difficult as it is difficult to find the right bandwidth to explain.  My brain, thoughts, wiring, etc is constrained.   I need to be able to expand outside of my own thoughts, wiring, bandwidth.   Imagine that I am a being who has the visible spectrum of Infra-Red to Green but can't see or perceive Indigo or violet.   Most people don't perceive Infra-Red but perceive Roy G. Biv or Red-Violet.   

I need to be able to to translate what you perceive in a way that I can understand.   For me to figure out things on my own within the limits of my neurology makes no sense and I need data including the thought processes including God to expland outside of my own brain.   

I tried to explain my point through your bandwidth and I thought I could but evidently through our exchanges here I failed.   I don't know why.   Must study and analyze more to understand your bandwidth.

[cubedemon]

Solar, why would I use my own brain when it is my very brain that led to my negative outcome?   That logic absolutely makes no sense.

[Solar]

Solar, why would I use my own brain when it is my very brain that led to my negative outcome?   That logic absolutely makes no sense.

Like all of us, we are constrained by limitations as hemans, we were placed here as blank slates, no knowledge of where we came from or where we're headed, and that's the beauty of life.
It's never the destination, rather the journey that of importance.

We were also made with physical limitations, and absolutely no Godly powers for a reason, otherwise we'd ruin our journey as well as those around us.
I think maybe the question you're asking is bigger than man? Assuming you're asking if man can achieve beyond the limits of humanity, God like powers?
Sure you will, when you die and shed this jail of a body.

[cubedemon]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3OXs_5AD2A

Watch this scene from the Matrix in which Neo meets the Architect.   The Architect tried to create the first Matrix as perfect.  It failed because people were imperfect.   The second one was the opposite and it failed as well.   So, the Architect realized that the solution to the problem of creating the perfect Matrix was beyond him, so he created the Oracle.

I think the idea that is inherent to this kind of applies to me.   I've been frustrated by failure no matter what things I've tried as the outcome.   So, I thought and thought and then I started thinking about how I thought and realized that the problem comes from my own thought processes.   If this is the case, than logically the solution to my issues can't from my own thought processes.   The solution has to come from a thinking and a mind that is different from my own.  Hence, my conclusion.   I need others to be able to provide guidance, instruction and answers to me.   The solution(s) to my problems can't come from my thinking since it is my thinking that causes the problem within our empirical and social construct.

If we go by Occam's Razor then we have to go by the most plausible of all explanations.   If I'm having issues functioning in society than the most plausible is that the problem lies within me and my thinking.  If that is the case, the solution lies outside of myself which is not a negative attitude but a conclusion derived by critical thinking which comes from my own thoughts.  Even if I am wrong does it not cause a paradox because I still have faulty thinking so therefore I have to be right by proof by paradox?

[cubedemon]

We all learn to cope. I am dyslexic, but nobody told me. Therefore, I had to make adjustments to make the best of my situation. Fortunately, I was able to do that. That affliction is nowhere near autism, but it is an issue. After observing cubedemon for numerous posts now I have come to the conclusion he has accepted his condition as an excuse rather than a challenge to overcome to the best of his ability.

We all learn to cope.  Huh?  What?   How do you even derive this?  Where do you get this from?   If everyone could truthfully cope like you claim than why are some people placed into mental institutions, group homes, prison or put a bullet into their head?

Here is where the issue lies.  Both you and WalkStall you say you could cope and you did cope.  Solar mentioned the disabled man he knew.   Problem is you're generalizing a small sample to the whole.   How do you know everyone or even the vast majority can cope and does cope?   

Let's look at this right here.  http://www.census.gov/prod/2013pubs/acsbr11-12.pdf

If we all could cope or the majority of us could cope than why does it say on page 2, in the middle of paragraph two it says "About one-in-three adults aged 18 to 64 with disabilities were employed in 2011, while three out of every four adults within the same age group and without a disability were employed."

So what this says is that about 75% of people w/o disabilities were able to cope and are employed and about 67% of those with disabilities were not able to cope and are unemployed?  Why is this so?   Do we all in the 67% group have generally a negative attitude and is this the only thing keeping us down?   If we all could change this like the blowing wind than why haven't we done so especially if it would benefit us and enable us to keep jobs?   Your logic and walkstall's logic makes no sense and doesn't stand up to scrutiny?   Let's say all of these welfare programs were eliminated tomorrow including SSDI.  How do you guys know that those who are on these things would become employed?   What is the basis for all of this? 

All you all are doing is providing testimonials which is insufficient evidence for a claim made.

[supsalemgr]

We all learn to cope.  Huh?  What?   How do you even derive this?  Where do you get this from?   If everyone could truthfully cope like you claim than why are some people placed into mental institutions, group homes, prison or put a bullet into their head?

Here is where the issue lies.  Both you and WalkStall you say you could cope and you did cope.  Solar mentioned the disabled man he knew.   Problem is you're generalizing a small sample to the whole.   How do you know everyone or even the vast majority can cope and does cope?   

Let's look at this right here.  http://www.census.gov/prod/2013pubs/acsbr11-12.pdf

If we all could cope or the majority of us could cope than why does it say on page 2, in the middle of paragraph two it says "About one-in-three adults aged 18 to 64 with disabilities were employed in 2011, while three out of every four adults within the same age group and without a disability were employed."

So what this says is that about 75% of people w/o disabilities were able to cope and are employed and about 67% of those with disabilities were not able to cope and are unemployed?  Why is this so?   Do we all in the 67% group have generally a negative attitude and is this the only thing keeping us down?   If we all could change this like the blowing wind than why haven't we done so especially if it would benefit us and enable us to keep jobs?   Your logic and walkstall's logic makes no sense and doesn't stand up to scrutiny?   Let's say all of these welfare programs were eliminated tomorrow including SSDI.  How do you guys know that those who are on these things would become employed?   What is the basis for all of this? 

All you all are doing is providing testimonials which is insufficient evidence for a claim made.

Every individuals and their circumstances are different. Therefore, I did not mean to make it general statement. However, what you mentioned about Walks, Solar and me reflects that people can overcome. The fact that you believe these are not evidence of people overcoming deficiencies confirms you have made the decision to dwell on the negative side of the issue.

I will end with a message a successful person I worked with shared with me over thirty years ago and I have never forgotten what he said.

"If you think you can, you can. If you think you can't. You are right".

Those are words that ring so true.

[Solar]

We all learn to cope.  Huh?  What?   How do you even derive this?  Where do you get this from?   If everyone could truthfully cope like you claim than why are some people placed into mental institutions, group homes, prison or put a bullet into their head?

So are you saying you're a victim, or that you should be in that class?

Here is where the issue lies.  Both you and WalkStall you say you could cope and you did cope.  Solar mentioned the disabled man he knew.   Problem is you're generalizing a small sample to the whole.   How do you know everyone or even the vast majority can cope and does cope?   

Let's look at this right here.  http://www.census.gov/prod/2013pubs/acsbr11-12.pdf

If we all could cope or the majority of us could cope than why does it say on page 2, in the middle of paragraph two it says "About one-in-three adults aged 18 to 64 with disabilities were employed in 2011, while three out of every four adults within the same age group and without a disability were employed."

Wow, so from that, you naturally surmised the group couldn't support themselves?
Have you ever heard of lying, dealing drugs, dealing in the underworld with the nefarious?

So what this says is that about 75% of people w/o disabilities were able to cope and are employed and about 67% of those with disabilities were not able to cope and are unemployed?  Why is this so?   Do we all in the 67% group have generally a negative attitude and is this the only thing keeping us down?   If we all could change this like the blowing wind than why haven't we done so especially if it would benefit us and enable us to keep jobs?   Your logic and walkstall's logic makes no sense and doesn't stand up to scrutiny?   Let's say all of these welfare programs were eliminated tomorrow including SSDI.  How do you guys know that those who are on these things would become employed?   What is the basis for all of this? 

All you all are doing is providing testimonials which is insufficient evidence for a claim made.

Have you actually looked at the economy? Half the people of working age are technically unemployed, as by design by the Marxist.
The left doesn't like free mkt capitalism, they want people dependent upon govt, it's the next step towards communism.
So don't base anything on those numbers, anyway, not to support your claims.
Try going back to 2000 , or the late 80s census for a more accurate picture of what America looks like when it's functioning normally..

[cubedemon]

So are you saying you're a victim, or that you should be in that class?

I never made any claim that I was a victim or that I was not a victim.  If I am a victim then I am a victim of my own ignorance and lack of understanding of things.  If I am a victim than I am a victim of not understanding as to how to gain wisdom and understanding.   Am I a victim of anything?   I have no clue and no way to derive if I am a victim or not a victim as I lack the wisdom that you have Solar.   


Since I am an ignorant man who knows not  here is what I do not understand.  The claim was made that we all learn to cope.   What is the basis for this claim that we "all" or even the vast majority learns to cope.   Those who were institutionalized could not cope.  Those who committed suicide did not cope.  Not only is all of these things are true for the history of the USA but it is true for human civilization.    What is the basis for this claim?   

Wow, so from that, you naturally surmised the group couldn't support themselves?
Have you ever heard of lying, dealing drugs, dealing in the underworld with the nefarious?

Point taken.   You're right, the data would have to be analyzed further and I need to learn to analyze stats better.   I did not think of your criteria that you thought of. 

Have you actually looked at the economy? Half the people of working age are technically unemployed, as by design by the Marxist.
The left doesn't like free mkt capitalism, they want people dependent upon govt, it's the next step towards communism.
So don't base anything on those numbers, anyway, not to support your claims.
Try going back to 2000 , or the late 80s census for a more accurate picture of what America looks like when it's functioning normally..

I will look at the 80s census when I have time.