Are there any substitutes for having inner peace?

wmscott, you are indeed guilty of the most annoying form of arrogance - deciding you are right and that everyone else is wrong, just because you said so.You have a certain belief system. You are entitled to it. You BELIEVE it to be the Truth, but by no means does your belief require anyone else to accept it as such. Quantify your "degrees of peace." How does one measure such a subjective concept? It is impossible. You cannot logically state that the amount of "inner peace" you feel that you attribute to your religion is any more or less than that felt by an atheist. A person can feel at peace from such mundane things as being an honorable, trustworthy, moral person. A person can feel at peace by raising children to be good and productive members of society. A person can be at peace by accepting the things they cannot change, and working to change those they can for the better. None of these things require a belief in God. These sources of inner peace can also not be destroyed - if you take away the child, the parent still knows that they raised a good and decent person. If you take away a persons ability to change the world, they still have the knowledge that they tried to leave the world a better place than it was before. God does not have a monopoly on the concept of Hope. God is not the sole source of a sense of self-worth.The question you asked in your original post was "What do atheists replace it with?" This question speaks volumes about your opinion of the beliefs of others. Atheists don't "replace" inner peace with anything. They don't have to. Anyone, atheist or not, can have a sense of inner peace. The fact that you believe that God gives a greater sense of peace does not make it true for anyone else. Prove it. Countless atheists and people of other faiths around the world live through greater deprivation and horror than you or I could ever dream of without losing hope, without giving up, and without losing their inner peace. Without the Judeo-Christian God. Again, prove it. You seem to subscribe to the old saying "there are no atheists in foxholes." I suggest you look to the number of atheists currently active in the US armed forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, facing greater horrors than you or I will ever be forced to, surrounded on all sides by people who want to convert or kill them, and yet still remain strong and do what they need to do.You're right - sooner or later something will happen in life. It does pay to be prepared for it. God does not have a monopoly on physical, mental, or emotional preparedness.

quote:

---

In February 1998, she founded the Military Association of Atheists and Freethinkers (MAAF). Since then, MAAF has become an active Internet community. Running the rapidly developing organization entirely from her home, with no funding from membership dues and consequently no Internal Revenue Service entanglements, Johnson now lists more than 110 names on the MAAF roster...
...The group is now affiliated with the Campus Freethought Alliance--it counts among its number several cadets and midshipmen in ROTC and the service academies--and, hence, the Council for Secular Humanism. MAAF is also part of the secular Web online community run by Internet Infidels. As luck would have it, the president of Internet Infidels, Jeffrey Jay Lowder, was active-duty Air Force at the time of the club's inception and was one of the first to join.

---

This is just what I found with a quick Google search. The fact is, my argument doesn't rest upon any specific number of atheists being active duty in the military, so long as the number of atheistic soldiers who posses an inner calm is greater than one. The fact that I know a few first Gulf War vets personally, some of whome are atheists and agnostics, is less provable via the internet.

I can agree that someone who does not believe in God cannot have peace that comes from God. What you have not proven, however, is that "God's peace" is greater or even any different at all than the inner peace people of other faiths and atheists can feel.Christians seem to find comfort and inner peace in "knowing" that their faith is the "correct" one, that God loves them, and that there is a heaven after death because their sins are forgiven. How is this differnt from a Hindu, for example, who "knows" that he will be reincarnated into a better caste some day? From a Buddhist meditating in a temple?Or from an Atheist who knows he has led a good life and brought happiness to others? It is true that faith in God can give a person the will and hope to carry on in extreme circumstances. What you have thus far failed to prove is that other religions and atheism can't give the same inner peace from a different source.

Should have mentioned this in my last post, but I just noticed this comment after I replied: I know several atheists personally who would take great offence to that statement. It is certainly arguable that God is necessary - it is arguable whether He even exists or not!Please provide evidence that all human beings, Christian or not, have a deep need for God. Please also note that "the Bible says so" is not evidence.

Change 3d to an inner peace that is unbreakable and we can actually debate this. As it is, you are defining that the highest peace comes only from God in the question, when that is exactly what we are debating. You see? You’re arguing as if you had already proven that the strongest sense of peace comes only from God. Then you say that only God can say for sure — if we mere humans can’t possibly know, then why ask the question to other mere humans? In this you are correct. But you have failed to prove that an Atheist or person of a non-Judeo-Christian faith cannot have a sense of inner peace that is just as strong as the peace that can be attained through faith in God. Please provide evidence for your argument. I will admit that my losing a child example was not the best — you are right in that it is one of the most horrible experiences a person can go through, and perhaps the most likely event to cause someone to lose their inner peace. But to say that hope of the resurrection is the ONLY source of comfort and hope is horribly bigoted and arrogant. A Hindu would draw comfort and hope from the belief that their child will be reincarnated, perhaps into a better life. And it is still valid to say that an atheist could take pride in the way they raised their child, and be at peace with the life their child was able to lead. I’m not saying that it doesn’t hurt like hell, and I’m not saying that it ever goes away. I am saying that a person can remain strong and retain a positive outlook on life and a sense of inner peace despite that pain. No. My premise is that people can find comfort in doing everything they are able, and then accepting the things they cannot change. None of us can stop death. We can’t even stop generally bad things from happening. We can still remain strong and persevere against all odds because of an inner sense of peace and hope. God is ONE source of that strength. Those who do not believe in Him can find other sources that can grant an equal peace. You make me sound like a monster — I am not saying at all that the pain of losing a child is not severe or that it goes away after a time. I fully acknowledge that it is one of the most grievous emotional wounds a person can sustain, and that it never truly heals. All I am saying is that, while God is one source of the strength needed to maintain a person’s inner peace through even such an ordeal, God is not the ONLY way. Atheists lose children just as often as Christians, it hits them just as hard, and I doubt you can show that every one of them loses their sense of inner peace any more than a Christian does. Here we go again. No, He does not. You believe Him to be the One True God. Other people believe in Allah, or Buddha, or Ra, or Odin. Each of these religions contain a belief in the afterlife, in life after death. You seem to have trouble acknowledging that people of other faiths are entitled to their own beliefs, and that to them, your God is just as much a myth as their gods are to you. Hope in an afterlife is not the only source of inner peace. Living the best, most honorable life you could, helping others as much as possible, and leaving the world a generally better place than when you got here is a perfectly noble and strong source of inner peace. The fact that everyone dies is a given to the atheist, a fact that cannot be changed. Most atheists would tell you that the important thing is not that you die, because everyone dies, but that the way you live the life you have is the important part. I have personally known several atheists who are more moral, more caring, more genuine, more emotionally stable, and mentally stronger than nearly all of the Christians I have known. My experiences would tend to disprove your assumption that all atheists are hopeless and dead inside. Now THAT is arrogant. Many people have read the Bible and concluded that it did NOT, in fact, provide satisfactory answers. To say that the Bible is the ONLY source of satisfactory answers is not only foolhardy, but bigoted against other religions beyond belief. Excuse me? We had THOUSANDS OF YEARS under the philosophies of religion and achieved NOTHING. Please note the Dark Ages, a period in which the Catholic Church enforced a Theocracy across all of Europe. Ever hear of the Inquisition? Yes, religion worked very well for us there. Or how about Afghanistan? The depravities of the Taliban were and still are done in the name of faith. Secular societies have only recently arisen, and in that time we have sent probes to the outer regions of the solar system, cured countless diseases, and improved the quality of life for BILLIONS of human beings. I’d say the philosophies of men have held up pretty well through some of the darkest periods of history, and advanced the entire human species.wmscott, you seem to be having a religious conversation rather than a debate. A debate requires evidence to back up claims. Thus far, your only evidence is that your beliefs come from scripture. You cannot prove an argument by referencing the Bible — that is a logical fallacy called an appeal to authority. Just because the Bible says it is true doesn’t MAKE it true. If it IS true, then you can support it with evidence, and let the argument stand by itself. If you would like to debate whether Atheists and non-Judeo-Christians can have a sense of inner peace just as strong as the peace Judeao-Christians draw from their faith in God, then please provide evidence to back up your claims.

PROVE IT!!!!!! Prove that you can not find equally strong inner peace without God. Many people on this very forum are telling you that they have done EXACTLY THAT. That’s an awfully bigoted and self-righteous statement. Ten people can read the Bible and come up with ten different interpretations of its True meaning. To say that your religion’s interpretation is the only possible correct one without anything to back it up is awfully arrogant. Isn’t true or real? An atheist could say, Well, you can’t show that your God exists, and I think your beliefs are unfounded and that you are wrong. Therefore, your inner peace isn’t as strong as mine and it’s not real. He would be just as wrong as you are. You have got to be kidding me. Greek/Roman Mythology contains just as many elements that could not have been of human origin as the Bible. Wow. No, you aren’t arrogant or bigoted at all. Shall we go through the lack of historical evidence for biblical events? Direct evidence to the contrary of what it literally states? So.the fact that the book is really old is the reason you believe it to be true? If I found a book buried in the ground dated to be about 20,000 years old that told of the exploits of the Giant Flying Spaghetti Monster, would it have any validity? After all, it’s really old, older than the Bible. Some believers claim some portions were written earlier than has been shown by analysis, but there is little to support such claims so there is no real reason that things were written so long ago. So the literary quality of the author gives credence to its validity?! A third grade student can explain in relatively poor literary fashion exactly why the sky is blue. As long as he gets the science right, does it matter if it equals Shakespeare in a literary sense? No, it’s not. The brutality, bigotry, and general evil of many of the events in the Bible (slaying of the firstborn of Egypt, killing 3000 friends and neighbors because they worshipped an idol when the Ten Commandments were given, etc.) are often noted, however. Yes, people SHOULD look at evidence. I’m still waiting for you to provide some for your earlier assertions. .in the Bible! The prophesies were fulfilled in the same collection of books! Robert Jordan’s Wheel of Time series contains prophesies that are fulfilled to the last detail in later books. That doesn’t make it real! No, it’s not. Norse mythology contains prophesies that were fulfilled in various myths. That doesn’t prove that they happened! A book CANNOT prove itself! Only EVIDENCE can prove or disprove anything.This has strayed far from your original topic. If you wish to debate the validity of the Bible and it’s literal accuracy, there is another forum for that. I’m sure the moderators would encourage you to start a new topic there rather than hijacking your own thread.This discussion is a debate to determine if non-Judeo-Christians can possess a sense of peace as strong as those who believe in God. You STILL have provided no real evidence. The Bible tells me so is an appeal to authority fallacy. Provide evidence for your claim or concede!

wmscott, you assume much. Apparently you don’t believe I, or anyone, can read a book and understand it without being told what to believe by another person. A Jehovah’s Witness, I assume. Prefer not to have someone tell me what I believe. I can decide what I believe in by myself, thank you very much. And I have found answers in the Bible, quite a few of them. I doubt they are remotely close to the same answers you have found, but that doesn’t mean my interpretation is wrong. I am just as entitled to it as you are to yours. First off, I don’t care which religion is the right one or not as far as Theocracies go. The fact is, if you operate under the laws of a given religion, all other religions are persecuted. The Catholic Church surely proved that with the Inquisition and the Crusades. The Taliban surely proved that with their strict interpretation and enforcement of Islam in Afghanistan. Even if we assume for the sake of argument that Jehovah’s Witnesses are correct, they would have no right to enforce their beliefs on people who believe differently. Secular society is the ONLY way to ensure that each religion’s rights are protected without infringing on the rights of others.Taking the bearing good fruit analogy, fundamental Christians (including Jehovah’s Witnesses) hope and pray for the Apocalypse, and the DEATHS OF BILLIONS OF PEOPLE! Not only that, you hope for the billions who die to be sent to eternal torment in Hell! You preach fear, fear of eternal torment to gain believers, rather than teaching people to do what is good and right for its own sake. You preach bigotry and persecution of any who do not follow your beliefs, being only nice enough to gain new converts. I don’t call any of that good fruit. I think that fails the love thy neighbor test. You know, by praying for his death and eternal torment and all. You would be surprised. You are correct that science only answers how with no regard to why (you assume that there IS a why, whereas science does not. There may be a great reason, but that’s not science’s job, that’s not what science is). Logic, however, DOES provide an excellent moral guide. Logic is not as cold and merciless as is shown in entertainment. Love thy neighbor as you love yourself is actually a moral guide that everyone, atheist or otherwise, can believe in, and non-Christians don’t need the Bible to tell them about it. I think that moral advancement comes from refining and revising outdated moral codes in favor of morality that makes sense. Non-Christians are perfectly capable of developing a good moral code just as strong and more sensible than the code put down in the Bible. Rules about sexuality and diet are irrelevant morally — breaking them hurts no one, and so they are not immoral. Theft, murder, rape, torture, etc. all have victims. People and/or society as a whole are adversely affected by them, and therefore they are immoral. You see? Science and logic just advanced morality past the outdated static rules set forth in the Bible. LOL indeed. The USSR was not the type of secular society I am speaking about. The USSR actively suppressed religion and encouraged atheism. This is no different and just as harmful as suppressing atheism and encouraging a specific brand of Christianity. The USSR failed as a society (in terms of being the best of all countries in which to live) because it operated from a position of fear and power, much like fundamental fire-and-brimstone Christians. Your witty retort is about as valid as if I were to use David Koresh as proof that all Christians are evil. Still spouting bigotry and arrogance, I see. Your position is impossible to test by your definitions. If a Christian (or Jehovah’s Witness) were to break, you would say they were not a true believer. If the Christian remains strong, you would claim it to be a gift of peace from God without further examination. The same results, of course, can be obtained from various cults. I don’t want to quote your entire story here, as it would make a long reply even longer. The story you post is quite admirable, but it doesn’t prove your point. It proves that many Jehovah’s Witnesses remained strong in their beliefs and chose concentration camps rather than betrayal of what they believed in. It does NOT prove that under the same circumstances, an Atheist or person of another religion would break by default. Can you offer evidence of this? Your claim requires that anyone NOT a Jehovah’s Witness would break under similar circumstances, every time.I refer you to these statistics: LinkProve that all other religious organizations cooperated with the Nazis. Prove that all of their practitioners also failed to take a moral stand. Prove that those who DID dissent were not sent to the concentration camps, and/or that they eventually broke down and renounced their faith. You make bold claims, wmscott, but I have yet to see any EVIDENCE! Ha! You most certainly have NOT provided evidence. You have proven that many Jehovah’s Witnesses had a sense of inner peace that was not broken by their experience in the Holocaust. Certainly this reflects well on those individuals, but you have NOT provided evidence that NON-Witnesses cannot have a sense of peace just as strong and just as unbreakable. All you have done is provided rhetoric and anecdotal evidence, which is worthless.Please also note that if God grants this unshakeable faith and peace to Witnesses, there should be NO de-conversions. This is not the case. You will of course say that these people must not have been true Jehovah’s Witnesses.I’ve said it multiple times already. PROVE THAT NON-JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES CANNOT HAVE A SENSE OF PEACE JUST AS STRONG.

The Bible contradicts itself all the time.

quote:

---

Ex.20:14, Dt.5:18
Thou shalt not commit adultery

​

vs.

​

Hos.1:2
"And the Lord said to Hosea, Go, take unto thee a wife of whoredoms...."
Hos.3:1
"Then said the Lord unto me, God yet, love a woman beloved of her friend, yet an adulteress."

​

Num.6:3
"He shall separate himself from wine and strong drink, and shall drink no vinegar of wine, or vinegar of strong drink, neither shall he drink any liquor of grapes, nor eat moist grapes, or dried."
Pr.20:1
"Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise."
Pr.23:20-21
"Be not among winebibbers.... For the drunkard and the glutton shall come to poverty."

​

Vs

​

Jg.9:13
"Wine, which cheereth God and man."
Ps.104:15
"Wine that maketh glad the heart of man."
Pr.31:6-9
"Give strong drink unto him that is ready to perish, and wine unto those that be of heavy hearts. Let him drink, and forget his poverty, and remember his misery no more."
Song of Solomon 5:1
"I have drunk my wine.... O friends; drink, yea, drink abundantly."
Jn.2:3-10
"And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine. ... His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it. ... Jesus saith unto them, Fill the waterpots with water. And they filled them up to the brim. And he saith unto them, Draw out now, and bear unto the governor of the feast. And they bare it. When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine ... the governor of the feast called the bridegroom, And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now."

---

Is Adultery wrong? Because God apparently ordered people to commit it occasionally. I drinking wrong? Because the Bible says not to drink wine, but then says wine pleases God and men, and Jesus Himself turned water into wine!The Bible is FILLED with contradictions. There is NO WAY to re-interpret those quotes to show which view is correct — the Bible straight out literally contradicts itself.The right interpretation of the Bible is highly subjective. This is part of the reason we have so many different denominations of Christianity. Claiming that your position is right because it is supported by scripture is not only a logical fallacy (appeal to authority), but is ALSO so highly subject to interpretation that one can prove that the Bible supports or condemns just about anything.I still see no proof that non-Jehovah’s Witnesses can not feel a sense of inner peace just as strong as Witnesses feel. Show evidence of these historical confirmations.As for the WoT analogy, it was an example only insofar as to show that a source cannot prove its own authenticity. Nothing more. You are still guilty of the appeal to authority logical fallacy. You argue that a thing is so because the Bible says so! That is not a debate, that is religious rhetoric. Provide evidence and let your argument rest on its own validity.One more time:
SHOW EVIDENCE THAT NON-JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES CAN NOT HAVE A SENSE OF PEACE JUST AS STRONG AS THAT FELT BY JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES!

This still isn't evidence to support his claim. He is arguing that people of other religions and atheists cannot possibly feel a sense of peace as strong what he feels from his religion. "Those with religious belief" could be not only Witnesses, but Mormons and Catholics and Protestants and Hindus and Muslims and....well, you get the point.A more cynical response would perhaps be "Ignorance is bliss."The evidence he requires to prove his point is impossible to attain. Any examples of people of other faiths with a strong sense of peace will be brushed aside as "not strong enough," even though the measurement is entirely subjective.

Oh, I most certainly agree. Bearing bitter fruit, indeed.Destroying families and friendships?
check.
Praying for the deaths of all non-Jehovah's Witnesses, a number in the BILLIONS, in a fiery apocalypse?
check.
Praying that all non-believers be sent to eternal torture in Hell? check.Not to mention how annoying it is to have missionaries come to your door trying to scare you into converting, because otherwise you're a dirty heathen condemned to hell.

It is certainly true that Jehovah's Witnesses have various rules and teachings that are identical to brainwashing and a cult mentality. They are certainly not alone in this, of course, but I think it's worth mentioning with regards to the mental health correlations mentioned previously.I stand corrected about the belief in Hell.I would also like to mention that, despite my criticism, I strongly believe that Jehovah's Witnesses in particular and any other faith in general certainly have the right to believe as they wish. I am not anti-religion (I believe in God myself), but I AM vocal when an unsupported claim is made. Especially when it's bigoted. To say that a particular faith, in this case Wintesses, are somehow set apart and "better" than everyone else is a drastic claim, and requires drastic evidence to prove.

Your quoting of the Bible is irrelevant to my point — I won’t interpret the Bible in the same way you do because I don’t take it literally on the vast majority of points. I only care about the message. I reached that conclusion after examining various discrepancies in the Bible (you may not see them as such, and that’s fine), and finding the core message to still be valid. You DO believe that billions of people will be killed by God. You may be trying to save them by conversion, but you still look forward to the coming of the resurrection even though it means that billions of people will have to die first, for no crime other than not believing the same thing you do. You may not actively pray for those people to die, but you approve of it as God’s Will and Judgment. So AIDS is the result of immoral sex? How do you figure? AIDS can be spread through a variety of ways, one of which happens to be intercourse, whether that intercourse happens in or out of wedlock. Mothers who abandon their children are not immoral because they had sex out of wedlock, they are immoral because they are murdering their newborn babies! Divorce and broken homes are not immoral by themselves — they are frequently the RESULT of immoral behavior like physical abuse. Wives of cheating husbands are certainly victims, but cheating is not the same as sex out of wedlock or other intercourse the bible considers immoral. Your example of the moral decay of society is highly subjective, and if you want to see my views I suggest you visit this thread. Thinking like YOURS, with the moral rule of religion, is helping to make the world the mess it used to be. Do you really want to live under the Taliban, or in the Dark Ages? Just because you would be on the side of the moral legislators doesn’t make it any less wrong to legally impose morality. Ever hear of the JEWS?! Yes, people of Jewish ancestry were thrown in the camps for their ethnicity, but non-Hebrews who practiced the Jewish faith were thrown in, too, because of their religion. Prove that every last one of them broke.Just because a person wasn’t sent into a camp strictly because of their religion doesn’t mean that the experiences there are not a valid test of their inner peace. Facing imminent death with atrocities on that scale all around you would test anyone’s sense of peace and hope. Prove that every non-Jehovah’s Witness broke under the strain. Your claim does not rest on other groups as whole entities, wmscott. You claim that non-Witnesses cannot feel a sense of peace as strong as Jehovah’s Witnesses. If Jimmy the Catholic was put in the camps for his own political stand against the Nazis, and if Jimmy didn’t give up his convictions against the regime, that single individual case would refute your claim. Saying that Witnesses as a whole were the only group that did not abuse other prisoners is not the same as saying that every member of every other group did. A person can go against the views of his religion’s policymakers and still draw a sense of peace from his beliefs. The fact that policymakers in the Catholic and Lutheran faiths supported the Nazis in NO WAY proves that every member of those two faiths also approved, and neither does it prove that every individual’s sense of peace was weaker than that of a Witness.

I find it to be a contradiction, in that God is apparently approving of a wife whose life has consisted entirely of repeated adultery. You may not see it to be a contradiction, but that’s the way I interpret it. You haven’t. You showed an apologetic interpretation that removes the inconsistency from your point of view by not applying the rules to Hosea’s wife. I still view that passage as contradictory. It most certainly does not. As others have mentioned, Jericho’s walls were destroyed by an earthquake long before the Biblical account took place. Sodom and Gomorrah’s remains have still not been found, and so we cannot possibly claim to have evidence as to how they were destroyed. Jehovah’s Witnesses will turn away from and never speak to former Witnesses except in civil greeting. Is this not true? If a spouse leaves the Witnesses, would that rule not ruin the marriage? Wouldn’t the sudden shunning of all of the former member’s friends who still are Witnesses ruin those friendships? Is not if you believe like me you’ll go to heaven, but if you don’t you’ll die forever not a scare tactic? Even if you don’t specifically say that, you still strongly imply that if you don’t convert, you will die with everyone else. I’m not saying that you can’t have a wife or friends. I’m saying that certain aspects of your religion can ruin relationships and friendships for no other reason than a crisis of conscience. Have you ever read any accounts of former Witnesses? It’s incredibly sad, and can cause real emotional harm.

This doesn't fit with your argument. You claim that absolutely no one who is not a Jehovah's Witness can experience true inner peace. To refute that argument requires only a single individual example of a non-Witness who posesses true inner peace.wmscott, you are making a flawed argument. If the only way we have to test your assertion is the behavior of an entire group in the concentration camps, nothing can be proven whatsoever. As you have mentioned, ONLY Witnesses were thrown in because of their faith alone. We cannot possibly compare the actions oany other group becuase they did not have the same experiences.If this is going to be a debate, it must be testable. If it is not, then it is simply bigoted religious rhetoric.

Here's my problem.wmscott is not saying that Witnesses are more likely to have true inner peace. He's saying that Witnesses are the only ones able to have true inner peace at all.His example of the Witnesses in concentration camps proves that they can have a very deep and solid sense of peace. Charles, whether they are a true cult or not is irrelevant - even inner peace sprouting from total brainwashing is still a sense of inner peace. We have no way or reason to differentiate.I can accept that Jehovah's Witnesses may be more apt to have a strong sense of peace than others. But even one single solitsary unique example of a non-Witness possessing a sense of true inner peace would refute his argument. I think we've done that several times.If you disagree, I'll add one more. Pope John Paul II. Agree with his religion and politics or not, who would have a greater faith in the afterlife than the Pope? The suffering that he allowed himself to go through so that he could continue his work as Pope, while certainly less than that faced in the concentration camps, was still extreme. He knew he was dying. During WW2, he studied at a secret seminary school while working in a quarry to avoid being deported to Germany. I'd say he had a pretty srong sense of inner peace and hope. He even drew it from the same place Jehovah's Witnesses do.I speak of the late Pope only because he is a highly visible and well documented person. It's tough to use John Atheist as an example becuase I don't know anything specific about his life.But this one example should be enough to refute wmscott's argument.