... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-mwldkOYSA

In this video i'm expressing the relative blindspots of the atheist theist debaters. Both sides are so wholly convicted to their vantage point that the debaters seems to talk right past each other. This is to say that the base expressions of both sides maintains a vernacular approach, and hence neither sides are looking for common understanding. -The atheist so clings to the fresh air of modern rationality as best, (I believe because of the nature of the work force demands for such a type of thinking). But, finds themselves repeating, not naming, not recognizing that "there" are historic rules of understanding which are distinct yet not rational. So they note them within rational absence or redundancy exclusion. -The theist is convicted (or finds refuge) to the 'inside' of: specific historic, non-logical, dialectical truisms which "inform" them of some direction humanity and their relative positioning within a grand temporal framework is affording them. "Ethics", "Normatives" 'cultural evolution', diachronics, etc, are often substituted for what I'm positing as 'Theoretical Dialectics' Please go to this link and find Theoretical Dialectics' half way down. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic Note that change moves in 3D spirals not 2D circles This link about Rhetoric supports the argument of 3 classical forms of discourse. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetoric Concerning the tautological nature of math & logic see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand_Russell Section "influence on philosophy" Wittgenstein's own influence on Russell, for example, in leading him to conclude, much to his regret, that mathematical truths were purely tautological truths, ...(thus came the name) Russell's Paradox, Links to some of these videos used are found at clutchology 's page video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5WiTIXiGn0 & http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOtGa5ziVkE&NR=1 Please understand that this video of mine is not necessarily congruous with topics of the videos that I'm using, but that these videos provide good content to support the 'aspect blindness' or lack of a name which the god argument flails about. Lastly, I'll say that extrapolations assumed from within the math toolbox of n-dimensional physical space as well as the spectrums of our human beings blindness to frequencies leave me, when i'm centered in that tool box, to a fence-sitting tool. I like the perspectives of all the people in this video. I think ffreethinker & his adversary just need an additive to there vocabularies. I think Npage needs to read the Tao Te Ching & learn to forget. Tooltime, needs to relax and consider a pre-logical world existing with ration ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FLGtVzRnlMo

symbiosis or cultural sproutings of ideas. Moral words are found as embedded within recursive languages only. The moral of the story is xyz. If we embed the word 'triangle' , then we have a moral if we remove the embeddedness we have no moral. Consider cannibals, who eat their enemies, and cannibals who only eat their dead enemies. Cory continues to time bind his words with quotes and name droppings, and Cory certainly is not giving credit to all of the ideas or sources that he inherits and expresses, it would be exhaustive. So why does his cherry pick what he needs to further some approach or agenda, I suppose we will find out where the tunnel of his thoughts are taking us. Don't be fooled into following his way as if it is 'the way'. It is 'the way' in as much as you follow it. It is 'the way' in as much as you accord, orient or align your perspective to his. ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yANAkmTJuI0

... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSJikq2438A