Hmmm... clicking on the thread title from audioz, I assumed I was about to be asked to review a Christian rock track with an open mind.
Well Chris, one of my professional roles in life is English teacher, this is my credential for offering you some guidance on writing. You have clearly demonstrated that you enjoy writing but I think you have still to learn how to write well. You've made a good start but you have annoying habits such as. Starting sentences in the middle of a sentence. Take a writing class or research what a sentence is: it is a complete thought, idea or point. A paragraph is a collection of related thoughts consisting of two or more sentences. People who like to read will be put off by badly organised writing. You might also think about using that writing rule about stating clearly at the beginning what your piece is going to be about, it can come in the form of a title or headline; you would state what you're attempting to explain, prove or disprove. Another aspect of your writing that removes enjoment from reading is your arrogance in placing your own conclusions and assumptions throughout instead of placing your conclusions and thoughts at the end. Alternatively, you could place these at the beginning as part of the introduction where you state the case you're trying to lay before the reader. Think about words like 'trying' and 'attempting,' incorporating these notions would elevate your writing to an intelligent level because you need to appear humble, fair and balanced in your thinking as a writer rather than arrogant and unfair. Where are you in your discussion? What are your credentials? Why are you writing the piece? What is the background or your motivation for writing it? You need to state these things clearly for credibility or to pique the interest of the reader. Organise your thoughts coherently; you could start with Beginning-Middle-End or Introduction-Main Account-Conclusion. As far as the content is concerned it is laden with half-baked and un-qualified assumptions. Saying that the death penalty is cognate with murder is nonsense; motivations and ethics for both are entirely different and they are therefore not on a par. On the religious quetion you arrogantly state the Abrahamic religions as seemingly the only religions on Earth omitting the Eastern religons such as Buddhism and Hinduism. A little research would reveal that Abraham is a construct of a borrowed, earlier Indian (from India) belief system concerning the "Father Brahma" (Ab-Brahman .. Abraham). Curiously Mohammed's name is fascinating. His name was actually "Ahmed," it was even foretold in religious scripture (I forget where) that, "...when the next one will come, his name will be Ahmed." Curriously Mohammed is made from 'Maha (from india meaning 'great') - Ahmed, or the 'Great Ahmed' .. Maha-ahmed .. Mohammed. Religious ignorance and misinformation in the world is rampant. Best of luck with your writing. Good writing requires good thinking.
Thanks for the information. Well noted. Although, I don't feel any of that was important, it was definitely refreshing to read. Did you know that "words" are a creation of humans? Of course you did. That's rhetorical. Definitions, English, how it's used. All of these things do and don't matter. But in your defense, yes! Without rules to the English language, there would be chaos. So there needs to be at least a rule of thumb to go by in order for people to understand one another. But that's only pertaining to people who really don't know how to spell at all VS a person that does. Only that my grammar isn't the best in the world. Haven't met a person that is. Even yours. I wouldn't say your grammar sucks, but your spelling definitely does. Like you don't spell "religion" "question" "organize" "enjoyment" and "curiously" correctly. Forgetting to capitalize "India" and many other things you would think an English teacher should know. (So much for professional lol) In your defense once again, did you know that it is scientifically proven that the smartest people in the world actually don't spell correctly? Their brains are moving so fast, they don't stop and think about the typos and imperfect grammar. So, no worries #TwoThumbsUp One thing that does matter in my lecture is the conveyance. Something I am pretty sure people will undoubtedly understand. While the majority of people who posted said that they liked it, only an English teacher would point out things that would obviously irritate him. Something I learned about this is that perception is reality. Things you know will change how you interact with people and how you perceive the world. A janitor is going to see things wrong with your pipes before you do. A construction worker is going to see things that's wrong with the foundation of your house before you do. You're not right for not knowing, you're not wrong for not knowing that either. But you know what? Thank you man. I'll look into that. I'm pretty sure you're quite passionate in your profession, and can also tell I'm passionate about what I'm trying to convey in the OP. Far as your rebuttal and sarcastic remarks by calling my lecture "half-baked" and "un-qualified assumptions": Implying that murder, taking a life, killing and the death penalty don't correlate in someway is a lack of perception on your part. You personally feel 'subjectively' that they don't. But taking a life is taking a life. The reason is different, not the act. But all three is the same action, regardless of how one feels about it. This is the part where we differentiate between what we have been programmed to accept VS what actually is. We are both aware that all three acts of taking life has a different motive. That's a 'No-Brainer'. So, good luck coming up with another argument for that one. Far as your thoughts on the religious aspect (you ALSO assumed me of being arrogant of): Everything you said makes no sense in regards to my argument. I'm looking at what you said in a unbiased manner and I still don't even get what point you were trying to make. Trying my best to understand what was the point. You must assumed again that when speaking on the Abrahamic religions, I must have meant just those religions in general. Let me rephrase, religion in its entirety has been a plague to mankind. Let me be more specific... ANY religion that tells you to kill another for not believing or following the same beliefs as you is a plague to mankind. Far as telling me the philosophy of writing: Thank you, I appreciate it.
Sorry but the guy was correct. I found the structure of your sentences so difficult to follow that I assumed English was not your first language. You may have the most profound and insightful things to say, but if you can't communicate these thoughts coherently then people will just give up after a couple of paragraphs.
And his English wasn't up to standard as well? Lol c'mon man. Nobody's perfect. We all eventually get better in writing. We're not going to be English professors right out of the gate. I posted that, "This part is pre-written...mostly from my own ideas and others I've accumulated over time" So, I agree that it is DEFINITELY all over the place. I have been working on that lecture since September. I definitely have a lot of work to do on it. But you get the gist. Maybe I need an editor. Lol... I'm not trying to be Mr. Know It All either. I've seen WAY worst. Information, English, presentation and grammar. But thanks for not coming off as an asshole like he did.
But my main point is, he used imperfect grammar, imperfect spelling while telling me about my imperfect grammar. It's funny to me due to the irony.
But despite all of that, his was ten times easier to read, which meant that I read ALL of what he had to say rather than just the first two paragraphs of what you had to say. I even found myself skim reading your reply to him because I got the gist of it which is that you don't take criticism very well. Like it or not, people will judge whether you have anything interesting to say based on how you say it. Or in other words, if people assess your communication skills to be muddled, then they may leap to the conclusion that your reasoning skills will equally be muddled and hence not bother taking any notice.
Man! I been getting assumptions all evening till' morning! It's amazing when you reassure someone that what they are thinking is entirely incorrect about you and they still don't understand. I adore criticism. I am the definition of reasoning! I TOTALLY get what he was trying to say regarding my writing. I TOTALLY get what you're saying. But you guys are assuming one thing after another man. I assure you, I DO take criticism very well and that I AM trying to reason with you. The problem isn't that, I hate when people assume things about me that aren't true. I don't like repeating myself. No matter how many times I tell you that I am not what you guys think I am, you will persist. The other problem is that despite your ability to understand him, others have said different in regards to my post. Despite you agreeing with him, he did EXACTLY what I did. I did NOT understand what point he was trying to make about Islam and India. His English was terrible and grammar was off. No different than how he perceived me. You read his and understood it more. Oh well man. Luckily for the both of us, your perception and my perception isn't some almighty truth where everybody else around us is wrong. World don't revolve around how I took him and the world don't revolve around how you took me and him. I'm honestly losing sight of what we are talking about here. You and him skipped some parts. May have ignored the whole bloody thing. Does that truly matter that 2 people and many more will? There will ALWAYS be an opposing argument no matter what it is. Whether it's the delivery or the content itself. Who cares, man. I've shared this lecture with many other people and none of them said what you 2 individual guys are saying. They understood it, and congratulated me for such a breakdown. However, I agree with you and him! There needs to be editing. I ALREADY KNEW THAT! lol. Just like in music man "NO MIX IS PERFECT!" so there will always be SOMEONE out there that feels the highs are too high or the lows are too muddy or something! It gets to a point where you have to ask yourself, "Is anything that these guys are saying about my mix even matter?" So what else is there you are trying to tell me? That, because you agreed to what he said and disagreed with me, that somehow we have to elaborate on my reaction of it? Will he reply back!? Will he give a damn!? Find out on the next episode of Dragon Ball Z!
Because I agree with others who have correctly criticised you? Don't be a fuckwit. It just means you're an ignorant cunt. lol
Confirmed, he is a troll. Hey... #Waves' By the way, defined correctly. They both assumed something I'm not, the first guy was no different in his English and grammar than I was. He pointed out things that was damn near unrelated to the topic at hand, and you use insults that really don't affect me in any way except laughter.
Not at all. I take it pretty well. Let me TRY to make you understand where I'm coming from. The first guy telling me how I should write is like a cigar smoker telling a cigarette smoker to quit. He's doing the same thing! Lol... But it's good to see that you're actually participating instead of clicking on "Disagree" "Funny" and "Dumb".
Oh looky! A guy that agreed with two people about my bad habits in writing and he forgot to spell "on" before " 'em. " ...How refreshing. Still don't get the point? Oh well...
Back to the topic ... found an interesting writing some time ago: http://www.omkarmusic.com/merry-christmas-and-a-happy-new-year Wrapped in a dream it presumably wants to avoid feelings of offense and indicates the concern is not about if the article is true or not, but has a meaning. Most interesting part: the real birthday of Jesus was abused and faked to overpower a poular religious festivity by the so called heathens. (" ... a tree which represented their worship of life itself.") I like the basic saying (as far as my interpretation goes) "whoever and whatever you are, the relationship to someone like Jesus is on a personal and intimate level and totally independent of any kind of organisation." Related to your topic I would add: moral is an invention of the church to practice power politics over a society and if we can replace "moral" with "rules", power politics is a common practice of any kind of organisation and so called relgions to rule a group of people. The invented rules do have nothing more than "God" himself in the back, this can be quite impressive and is able to create fear to the very bone, right ? The very sad thing to me is, this power politics is exactly the reason why people are disconnected to the "real deal", the honey that might be there and has to be discovered individually.
