Re: "Real" ringworlds
 

read it again. you define faith differantly than i do. i know that if i have faith that i will get an answer, i will get an answer. that is verification.

Re: "Real" ringworlds
 

I define faith correctly.

Re: "Real" ringworlds
 

dictionary definitions are not always accurate for each persons use.

Re: "Real" ringworlds
 

I never used a dictionary. In fact, my "definitions" are the complex extended ones, not dictionary ones. And, words have specific, universal meanings. They are not dependant upon the speaker.

Re: "Real" ringworlds
 

like, i don't think so. so you know, like not. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif
ok, that answers kinda cheezy, but the meanings of words, to the people involved, can change radically depending on region and dialect. any universal, overarching meaning isn't dependent on mortals. which is one reason to listen for the sense of the words.

[ May 22, 2003, 07:41: Message edited by: narf poit chez BOOM ]

Re: "Real" ringworlds
 

Sigh. That applies in limited scope to words that are only in certain regional dialects, yes. But, complex words do not change drastically in meaning from one region to another. And even if the word is used in a slightly different manner, that is immaterial; it is the concepts that matter. You are not understanding the concepts of the various forms of faith. You are only able to make your argument because you are using the wrong meanings of the word faith in the wrong context. If you refuse to even listen to my arguments instead of just brush them aside as you are currently doing (no counter-argument has been made at all), then there is little point in discussing this with you.

[ May 22, 2003, 07:58: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

Re: "Real" ringworlds
 

ok.

[ May 22, 2003, 08:02: Message edited by: narf poit chez BOOM ]

Re: "Real" ringworlds
 

You responded before I finished fixing my post...

Re: "Real" ringworlds
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">it looks like a counter-argument to me. at the very least it's an argument and a statement of opinion.

[ May 22, 2003, 08:05: Message edited by: narf poit chez BOOM ]

Re: "Real" ringworlds
 

No, it is not a counter-argument. It is a repetition of your misuse of "faith" to try to prove a point.