Can God See the Dark?

[ChristineM]

You're likely wasting your time on this. I just did this dance with him last evening.

I'm learning his MO is to post ambiguous statements and then insult people's intelligence by stating that they misinterpreted what he meant. They have a name for that behavior...

Yes i understand that, I danced with him a few days ago and he tried the same trick then.

When im insulted i have a tendency to respond in kind, only more so, it seems to work most of the time, if not there is always the ignore option. I guess a a staff member you don't have that option.

 

[Axe Elf]

Your post said

I know. I guess that means you understand what it said now?

 

[Axe Elf]

I'm learning his MO is to post ambiguous statements and then insult people's intelligence by stating that they misinterpreted what he meant.

lol

Ambiguous statements like "Nobody can see the darkness at all"?

"Ambiguous" means that the meaning is unclear, not simply that you misread it, misinterpreted it, or just don't understand it.

 

[ChristineM]

I know. I guess that means you understand what it said now?

I understood from the beginning that you have problems articulating what you actually mean

And this isnt the first time.

 

[ChristineM]

lol

Ambiguous statements like "Nobody can see the darkness at all"?

"Ambiguous" means that the meaning is unclear, not simply that you misread it, misinterpreted it, or just don't understand it.

Yes the meaning is clear, and i commented on that clarity. No one else's problem but your own

 

[MonkeyFire]

Darkness and zero are things.

 

[Axe Elf]

I understood from the beginning that you have problems articulating what you actually mean

A difficulty in comprehending written English does not mean that the writer had problems articulating his meaning.

I clearly stated, "Nobody can see the darkness at all," and you responded as if I had said, "Nobody can see in the darkness at all," by asserting that we can still see, that our eyes are still functioning, even when there are no photons to interact with our retinas. That is not the same as being unable to see a thing called darkness.

The problem in this communication lay with your errant decoding of the message from the English words into which it had been correctly encoded.

 

[ChristineM]

A difficulty in comprehending written English does not mean that the writer had problems articulating his meaning.

I clearly stated, "Nobody can see the darkness at all," and you responded as if I had said, "Nobody can see in the darkness at all," by asserting that we can still see, that our eyes are still functioning, even when there are no photons to interact with our retinas. That is not the same as being unable to see a thing called darkness.

The problem in this communication lay with your errant decoding of the message from the English words into which it had been correctly encoded.

Nope the problem lay in your lack of knowledge of the working of the eye.

Its the difference between "Nobody can see the darkness at all" and "there is nothing to see in total darkness"

 

[YmirGF]

lol

Ambiguous statements like "Nobody can see the darkness at all"?

"Ambiguous" means that the meaning is unclear, not simply that you misread it, misinterpreted it, or just don't understand it.

Actually, through some weird genetic voodoo, I can see quite well in the dark! (My eyes adapt very rapidly,) So, I can see well enough so that I don't stumble around much.

 

[Axe Elf]

Actually, through some weird genetic voodoo, I can see quite well in the dark! (My eyes adapt very rapidly,) So, I can see well enough so that I don't stumble around much.

Actually, you don't see quite well in the dark--but chances are that you are rarely exposed to total darkness. Your eyes may be quite good at perceiving the light that is present, but even nocturnal animals that we think of as being able to "see in the dark" can't see in total darkness. If there are no photons present to reflect off of objects, seeing is not possible.

Now, some creatures have the ability to sense electromagnetic radiation that is outside of the visible spectrum (such as infrared body heat), but in the traditional sense, "seeing" is only done in the visible spectrum (that's why they call it that).

 

[Axe Elf]

Nope the problem lay in your lack of knowledge of the working of the eye.

Its the difference between "Nobody can see the darkness at all" and "there is nothing to see in total darkness"

Nope. You continue to be mistaken, and I continue to be amused by your apparent pride in that fact.

I have a Master's degree in Psychology, with specialization in Perception & Sensation. My thesis was on "The Perceived Size of Afterimages in Two-Dimensional Pictorial Displays."

If there is one thing I am intimately familiar with--well, ok, if there are two things I am intimately familiar with--one of them is the structure and function of the eye and its components.

Projections and finger-pointings notwithstanding, it was you who confused my original statement of "Nobody can see the darkness at all," with "Nobody can see in the darkness at all"--and everyone who has read this thread knows it. There's no escaping the plain facts.

 

[YmirGF]

Actually, you don't see quite well in the dark--but chances are that you are rarely exposed to total darkness. Your eyes may be quite good at perceiving the light that is present, but even nocturnal animals that we think of as being able to "see in the dark" can't see in total darkness. If there are no photons present to reflect off of objects, seeing is not possible.

Now, some creatures have the ability to sense electromagnetic radiation that is outside of the visible spectrum (such as infrared body heat), but in the traditional sense, "seeing" is only done in the visible spectrum (that's why they call it that).

I recognize that contextualizing is difficult these days, but I am doing my best to rectify this.

 

[ChristineM]

Nope. You continue to be mistaken, and I continue to be amused by your apparent pride in that fact.

I have a Master's degree in Psychology, with specialization in Perception & Sensation. My thesis was on "The Perceived Size of Afterimages in Two-Dimensional Pictorial Displays."

If there is one thing I am intimately familiar with--well, ok, if there are two things I am intimately familiar with--one of them is the structure and function of the eye and its components.

Projections and finger-pointings notwithstanding, it was you who confused my original statement of "Nobody can see the darkness at all," with "Nobody can see in the darkness at all"--and everyone who has read this thread knows it. There's no escaping the plain facts.

Big deal with your masters, i have 2, in art based subjects (i.e. interaction of light)

Your original statement was clear, it still is and im not the only one to comment on it.

I had no confusion and you know it. And now you are waffling and making up bs about my understanding of your post so you can wriggle out of poor phrasing

 

[Axe Elf]

Big deal with your masters, i have 2, in art based subjects (i.e. interaction of light)

Your original statement was clear, it still is and im not the only one to comment on it.

I had no confusion and you know it. And now you are waffling and making up bs about my understanding of your post so you can wriggle out of poor phrasing

Nope, you were wrong, and everyone knows it.

 

[Axe Elf]

Obvious to you and me, perhaps. Others in this thread, not so much...

 

[SalixIncendium]

Yes i understand that, I danced with him a few days ago and he tried the same trick then.

When im insulted i have a tendency to respond in kind, only more so, it seems to work most of the time, if not there is always the ignore option. I guess a a staff member you don't have that option.

As a staff member, I don't have the ignore feature the software offers, but I never really used it before I joined the staff. I'm pretty good at just scrolling past peoples' posts I don't think are worth my time.

I don't feel the need to tell someone I'm ignoring them either. I'm pretty certain they'll figure it out when I stop responding to their posts.

 

[ChristineM]

As a staff member, I don't have the ignore feature the software offers, but I never really used it before I joined the staff. I'm pretty good at just scrolling past peoples' posts I don't think are worth my time.

I don't feel the need to tell someone I'm ignoring them either. I'm pretty certain they'll figure it out when I stop responding to their posts.

I have only used is rarely, and don't advertise the use, unlike some who seem to feel it's a threat.

 

[ChristineM]

Nope, you were wrong, and everyone knows it.

Well you obviously think so because it pops your bubble... but for your information, you are not everyone.

 

[Axe Elf]

Well you obviously think so because it pops your bubble... but for your information, you are not everyone.

I am not everyone. But I, and everyone else, knows that you're still wrong.

 

[viole]

For the purposes of this argument, assume that an omniscient being (God) exist that senses all things at all times. That means he can see all objects regardless of light level. That means the dark is no hinderance to his perception. Would that not mean that he can not see the darkness at all? Afterall, the darkness dosen't exist, it just us being unable to perceive objects without light, while God can.

I doubt it. That is why he created light first. So that it could see how good he was doing creating all that stuff.

Ciao

- viole