I have not had time to go through the walls of text, I'll try to get to it.
And how does one debate without philosophy? That would equate to kids calling each other names.
If you're going to rule philosophy out of your thought patterns, you're leaving out half the function of your brain.
It is a necessity of adaptation to be open to differing philosophy.
I actually completely agree with dank inasmuch as attempting to rule out philosophical arguments from a debate makes it completely pointless.
But, Dank, you are the
king of grasping at straws (which happens every time we say something and you turn it into some personal tale of being persecuted for sharing your spiritual beliefs on this forum). You rarely directly answer the questions that are asked of you.
Also, beware of 'concept extension" which occurs when you start applying philosophical concepts where they have no business being applied in an attempt to explain
everything. In doing so, you completely dilute the strengths of those same concepts when applied in a context to which they are actually relevant. That may sound confusing, but you can look to other disciplines to see where this becomes a problem, such as in the field of social work in which literally every societal or economic issue can be explained away in terms of 'oppression' or some other popular buzz word. You're no different when you say things like "I am everything" and then use that principle as a starting point to attempt to explain away every possible issue or situation that arises. Indeed, it may be a great starting point for many debate topics, but not this one. Nobody is here to debate your philosophical beliefs, we simply want you to directly ask the questions asked of you in a format that you suggested in the OP.
If this was a philosophy or spiritual forum, then that would be great. But you generally make only two kinds of threads here: 1) Talking about your beliefs, and 2) asking for loans. When those are your primary motives for posting on a *Bitcoin* forum, something is obviously suspect to further inquiry. There are much better audiences for you to preach to, so that leads me to believe that either you're unwise for selecting and persisting upon this audience, or preaching simply isn't your number one motive here (but money is).
Go ahead and use your philosophical arguments, but respond *directly* to the questions asked of you. Otherwise, it confuses us when you say you want to debate but keep on parroting the same spiritual motives like a broken record. Every thread of yours turns into The Dank Show and you see it as an opportunity to preach like a baptist minister. Don't give dodgy responses. If you're not sure what those are, then let me suggest paying attention to how many times you respond to questions about your debt to Squall with some statement about either the nature of the self or of the Universe, or some statement about your political or moral viewpoint. Nobody will *ever* (ever!) believe that somehow not repaying Squall and focusing on a life of preaching, guitar playing, crop sowing, and raising chickens will auspiciously provide more benefit to the Universe. If you were to magically (for you, perhaps more magical than levitating) change, address the questions asked of you directly, and make repaying your debt to squall your primary concern, I bet that would shock more people here than your nuggets of wisdom, and probably even re-instill within them some faith in humanity.
