Are you able to answer multiple questions?

Coffee ice cream in a sugar cone. (Unasked question: with chocolate sprinkles on top.)

Haha. I feel your pain, @tom_g, but only when what I’m interested in is people’s reaction to cone types. I’m guilty of answering only part of the question at times. I think it most often occurs when I don’t expect to be moved to answer at all, but then find I have a strong reaction to one particular aspect of the question.

I think that this an issue that should lead us to ask more succinct questions. If I want to know about people’s cone type preferences, perhaps I shouldn’t have led off with a preamble about ice cream flavour, you know? Either ask the question you want the answer to, or break it down into a few questions. Otherwise, I can guarantee people will pick the bits that most interest them, and ignore the rest.

chocolate-nuts in a dense, sweet cone.

Yes.

(I frequently only answer the “topic question” that grabbed my interest, and sometimes don’t read all of the detail.)

I almost never eat ice cream – maybe once a year.

But when I do, it is chocolate mint, and it is always in a cup/bowl (Cones are messy), and it is never adulterated with sprinkles or nuts or (god forbid) chocolate syrup.

I’m with @janbb

Coffee ice cream, sugar cone, or, runners up: Maple Nut, in a bowl, with extra chopped walnuts, ditto with Rocky Road, and 3rd choice, Mint Chocolate Chip, followed by Butter Pecan and also Pistachio Nut.
Now I’m the type to add all sorts of trivial detail too. I also like milk in my ice cream if it is in a bowl and like to whip it up into milkshake consistency. If I buy Ben & Jerrys “Pistachio Pistachio” I also buy extra shelled Pistachios to ramp up the decadence.

Oh, and I adore Raspberry Sherbet, my ice cream of choice all summer this year, AND…Klondike and Its it Ice cream sandwiches, and, and, .....
Not only can I answer multiple questions I can ramble on for hours.
I’m the queen of free association. lol

1. Vanilla has always has been my favorite. I also love butter pecan.
2. Usually in a bowl because I hate it when my hands get sticky.
3. I like both waffle cones and plain ones.

Some of the questions, to me, are not very well written. Take ETpro’s questions for example, he may go a little long & wander a bit in the explanation, but the question is usually very clear.

I like neopolitan in a waffle cone, btw. :)

Chocolate; in a bowl.

Thanks. Now you’re all just messing with me. I hope. :)

Coffee almond fudge and pistachio, all on a sugar cone.

I don;t answer all the nuances of a question, because it makes it overly burdensome and prevents a short direct answer. Sometimes the subsidiary questions are based on assumptions of how the early questions are being answered.

If the original question is based on a false premise, one can’t answer the follow up questions.

Vanilla in a sugar cone.
Peach in a bowl.

There!

@zenvelo: “If the original question is based on a false premise, one can’t answer the follow up questions.”

What if every single follow-up question is designed in response to the assertion that the original question is false?

To what purpose is asserting that the question has a false premise without providing an explanation of why the premise is false?

“Your question about ice cream is based on a false premise! Ice cream itself is of a dairy nature. To consume it is to not consume it.”

“Ok. So, if I understand you correctly, you don’t like ice cream, so therefore you don’t have a favorite ice cream that is consumed in any way with any cone? If this is correct, what do you eat when your family or friends are eating ice cream?”

“If consuming ice cream is not consuming ice cream, then not consuming ice cream is something I do.”

“Ok, so if I understand you correctly, you do not consume ice cream, correct?”

“The original question is based on a false premise.”

Why be so secretive? If someone is trying to understand why the premise is flawed, questions that are specifically designed to discover why the premise is flawed and what your position actually is seem more than appropriate for a rational discussion on any topic.

I have to go find some ice cream. I’ll be back later…

Jamoca Almond Fudge from Baskin and Robbins, usually in a cup, but if I get a cone it would be a sugar cone.

I also like mint chip once in a while in a cake cone.

I rarely eat ice cream though. Maybe 4–6 times a year.

People just don’t read the entire post sometimes so they don’t answer all the questions. Sometimes I do read it and still miss answering part of it.

@tom_g Oh yeah – just messin’ with you. Now – what was the question?

@janbb I think there was more than one.

It’s all or a combination of factors you mentioned. Sometimes I’m in a hurry. Sometimes I don’t take the question seriously so I don’t read the details, or I’m playing video games and intend to write a longer answer, but then something comes up where I have to get back to the game.

I’m also a boring guy. I just like regular vanilla or vanilla bean. I like it in a bowl because it’s just easier to eat, plus I can add milk if I want to (I do that sometimes).

I do like cones but only the one with the chocolate coating inside.

@glacial And I thought I had answered all three.

@janbb I count six. ;)

I like chocolate chip cookie dough the best! Yum. LOL!

@tom_g: “I have to go find some ice cream. I’ll be back later…”

I failed to find ice cream near my work. There is a convenience store nearby that only sells novelty ice cream treats. I guess I’ll have to eat a plain Greek yogurt.

Coffee or chocolate. In a bowl please.

An ice cream sandwich after a long night of partying.

Hold on now. Am I right that the Capricorns like coffee ice cream? I know this is off topic, but I see a pattern. I am shocked to begin with that so many people have answered coffee ice cream or some form of. When I was little I was the only one who had coffee ice cream at their birthday parties and I was the only one eating it. The other kids had the neapolitan, or some part of.

Q.E.D.

@JLeslie I like coffee ice cream as well, but I’m an Aquarian, pretty close sign wise.

@KNOWITALL January?

always prefer bowl.
favorite ice cream is Chocolate Chip! But you can’t really find that anywhere these days.:( Allyou can find is cookie dough. So, that’s usually what I get.

So happy to have the chance to complain about this lack of chocolate chip!

@JLeslie Yep, Roe Vs Wade to be exact.

I like all ice cream. If I am having just ice cream, I will have raspberry ripple. I love baileys ice cream with a little baileys poured over it. I like it in a bowl. Unless I am out obviously and I will have it in a cone. Just a plain one with nuts and strawberry sauce on top.

@KNOWITALL Maybe it is a January thing. I think the Capricorns here are all January babies, but I might remember incorrectly,

@tom_g I do provide the reason for why I state the premise is false. Sometimes my statement is ignored, as it was in a recent thread.

Recently I was in a discussion (and you participated) in which the question was, essentially, “how does X control Y?” I replied, “X doesn’t control Y, Y affects X”. And then I was questioned on why I didn’t answer subsidiary questions. And I did follow up with an explanation of the relationship of X and Y, to which I was again questioned, but the original poster was never questioned about why he posited the original statement.

@JLeslie This Capricorn is a Dec. 26 baby and…my native american totem animal is the goose. Go figure. lol

@zenvelo – I suggest you go back and re-read that thread. I’ll bring over some of it for you….

@zenvelo: “The soul doesn’t control or influence the brain or the physical, you’re conflating spiritual center with the physical body. Our behavior is not ruled by our souls.”

@tom_g: “Does this mean that there is no connection between the soul and the self? Does the soul have characteristics? In other words, does the soul influence in any way (not “rule”) behavior, intention, desires, etc?

Edit: If the premise of the question is incorrect, and nobody is able to discern why that is, it might help to explain rather than simply asserting that the premise is incorrect.”

Note: I am attempting to nudge you into expanding on your position and explaining it in a way that makes sense to me (and likely anyone who has sat around for years wondering what it means to believe in a soul). This isn’t some cute attempt at being intentionally obtuse. I really want to know.

Now, your response to my attempt to get you to clarify…

@zenvelo: “You are confusing connection with causation. I ma saying the should doe snot control or drive the physical or the mental or emotional being, it’s a one way influence o the other direction. The physical actions, the mental actions, the emotional being, all result in the state of the soul.”

Note: Ignoring the typos, I now started to gather (after much prodding) that you were stating that we had it backwards (possibly, maybe, who knows).

@tom_g: ”The point of my question was an attempt for you to elaborate so that I wouldn’t be so confused. This likely requires a conversation, rather than comment bombs.

So, if I understand what you are saying:

The soul is an entity that is a result of the physical actions (works), mental actions (beliefs), and emotions of a person. Is this correct? If it is, could you elaborate on…

- If my brain is damaged and it results in a change in the 3 things that result in my soul, does that actually change my soul?
- Does the soul grow (not in size, but in its characteristics) as a human ages? For example, is the soul of an infant different from the soul of an adult since the 3 things that build the soul have been limited?
- Is the soul immortal?
- Does your understanding of the soul match any particular doctrine? In other words, for more details could I research a particular religion or sect to expand my understanding?”

Note: You’ll notice that I am again bending over backwards trying to understand what you are saying as to not misrepresent your position, which up until this point has been represented in esoteric short comments that have yet to attempt to relate your beliefs on the matter to the questions that I am asking or the ones from the original question that are closely related.

But you do respond again…

@zenvelo: “My explanation of the soul as a reflection of the human’s physical/spiritual/mental/emotional self derives from basic Roman Catholic teaching. The soul is the spiritual reflection of the self that connects with the Divinity. Through the actions of the human, the soul may be besmirched or the soul may be “cleansed”/restored.

I always thought of it as a big etch-a-sketch in which our actions can be recorded, and through conscious action can be shaken clean.”

Note: So rather than quote my rewording and let me know where I have it wrong or make any attempt to answer my simple questions (again), you answer the “doctrine” part only and answer in a way that you now must be aware of will simply generate more confusion. There is no way for me to read your answer and resolve the fact that you didn’t make any effort to answer the questions that would have helped me understand you better. It’s as though you are intentionally trying to go misunderstood. In no way does “the original question had a flawed premise” have any connection to the fact that you repeatedly engaged me in the most dismissive and intentionally confusing way possible.

I was born on January 1st.

From ice cream to deep, philosophical discussion. Only on Fluther with all the mega minds in action, and I thought I was a non-linear thinker. lol

@Coloma Oh, I find that to be a Capricorn trait also. All sorts of thoughts connecting together and able to carry on three conversations at once. My husband can’t do it; he is an Aries. He is a pecan praline person. LOL.

Ha-ha! This thread is pretty funny. The questions has nothing to do with ice cream, bowls or flavors. It only has to do with a person’s ability to answer multiple questions at once. I get confused if too many questions are piled on me at the same time. It’s okay if the questions are written down, because I can re-read it to make sure I got all of the components. But orally, I start loosing track of them. After about the third question, I usually stop the asker and say “okay, one question at a time.”

By the way, I am an Aries.

WTF with the zodiac signs?

@JLeslie Haha…me too, my brain is a pinball machine I can zing between topics with ease, but, this ability used to drive my ex husband crazy…slow brained types can’t keep up. lol

Mocha in some form (or a mix of coffee and chocolate), or mint choc. chip in a glass with club soda or seltzer to make a beverage and to foster the illusion that I am eating a smaller portion of the ice cream

Shoulder holster

@glacial I started it. I saw a pattern.

@Skaggfacemutt Hahaha. Love it. We need a separate Q for astrological signs now.

I’m an Aquarius and proud of it.

No, I often discuss the main question, or the general subject without answering anything specific.

@YARNLADY Do you love our song as much as I do?

“This is the dawning of the age of Aquarius….” lol

@tom_g Okay, I have some time now.

- If my brain is damaged and it results in a change in the 3 things that result in my soul, does that actually change my soul?

No, it doesn’t change the soul,but because of the inability to sin and a general absolution of the innocent, those who are impaired from making a conscious decision, there i sno blemish. That’s why there is no sin and no need for confession until the age of consent which is the age at which a person not only knows right from wrong, but has developed a conscience that can make an informed choice between right and wrong.

- Does the soul grow (not in size, but in its characteristics) as a human ages? For example, is the soul of an infant different from the soul of an adult since the 3 things that build the soul have been limited?

No, the soul does not grow, It is a spiritual being, not a physical being.

- Is the soul immortal?

Yes.

- Does your understanding of the soul match any particular doctrine? In other words, for more details could I research a particular religion or sect to expand my understanding?”

Much of this is laid out in the Baltimore Catechism and in other Roman Catholic teachings.

@tom_g What the hell are you talking about? I thought you said you weren’t talking about any specific set of questions. Wow, I can’t change gears that fast.

^ Thanks!

@zenvelo: “No, it doesn’t change the soul,but because of the inability to sin and a general absolution of the innocent, those who are impaired from making a conscious decision, there i sno blemish. That’s why there is no sin and no need for confession until the age of consent which is the age at which a person not only knows right from wrong, but has developed a conscience that can make an informed choice between right and wrong.”

So, if I understand you correctly, “The soul is an entity that is a result of the physical actions (works), mental actions (beliefs), and emotions of a person. Is this correct?” If this is correct, it is with a few caveats, right? That is, this thing hinges on the existence of traditional free will, so when the brain is damaged, we are likely side-stepping free will so actions and thoughts will likely not reflect back on (and alter) the soul?

So, a soul “as a reflection of the human’s physical/spiritual/mental/emotional self” means that the “self” influences the soul only when the self is unimpeded by brain malfunction or damage. Correct?

If so, then this is something that easily ties to @LostInParadise’s original question. He specifically spoke about alcohol and other drugs, as well as psychological orders, and the connection between these things and the soul. Your input would have been valuable to explain your belief in this context. That is what was being asked. It sounds like you are correct that the assumption was that the soul influences the self rather than the other way around. But explaining this would be helpful to us.

@zenvelo: “No, the soul does not grow, It is a spiritual being, not a physical being.”

I specifically made sure this was not a point of confusion. Is the soul immutable? If the answer is yes, than that would completely contradict what you are stating concerning the relationship between the soul and the self. So, I do need clarification on this point.

Anyway, this is simply just the beginning of the conversation because the real meat comes next. But I suspect you are quite uninterested in this topic, so I will leave it at that.
Thanks for answering these questions.

@Skaggfacemutt: ”@tom_g What the hell are you talking about????”

I’m talking about major league baseball and the designated hitter rule.

To speak of innocence by impairment, the cause of the impairment must be viewed. Just as being drunk does not acquit you of murdering someone, so being drunk or high absolve one from marring the soul. The soul may be blemished by commission of sin, and restored to its pristine state through repentance, confession, and penance.

But also consider that the mentally impaired are, at some point, not held to guilt for some things like murder, but are innocent by reason of insanity. The problem in judging the soul is that it is judged by the divine, not by man.

The soul is not immutable, but it does not carry the physical aspect of dimension. As I stated, it can be blemished, but it does not grow or diminish.

(I think this is the Ultimate Fluther question. It contains all the best and the worst of Fluther in a single thread.)

I think @tom_g and @zenvelo need to get a room. :)

I messed up in my answer two slots above. Too late to edit,

It should be ”...so being drunk or high does not absolve one from marring the soul.”

There is no such thing as a soul.

I think about this every time I see a person post “I agree”. And then have that response get 5 lurve. While someone who wrote paragraphs of thoughtful analysis gets ignored. People have need to post on the question, even if they do not add to the discussion. Kilroy was here.
Your point is a variant of it. Maybe they cannot answer (or understand ) the grander aims of a question. But they sure got this one point down. So they post on it, and the part they don’t get doesn’t exist for them.

Also, welcome to the internet. At some point TL;DR takes over.

The person who invented ice cream had a soul.

How do you supposed someone was able to make the leap from sugar, cream, milk and flavoring to ice cream?

(And don’t give me that crap about flavored snow.)

I haven’t seen pancakes mentioned yet?

But I will give you the divine truth about flavoured (that is how it is spelt) snow.
The Persians did it.

When the fuck did we get ice cream?

@Blondesjon
Arabs.

@ragingloli But isn’t that the stuff you pound out?

Ben and Jerry’s New York Super Fudge Chunk, the whole goddamn pint, right out of the carton with my favorite spoon (it’s slightly heavier than average, with a deep bowl)

And the designated hitter just makes for a pussy pitcher.

@ragingloli yes but spelt isn’t spelt that way!

@drhat77 – Yes it is. It’s archaic, but correct. I prefer it, myself.

Mmmm… spelt.

Fuck ice cream, it’s the M&M peanuts in my ringside seat right now. lol
Okay…lets talk about squash. All of you murderous pumpkin carvers repent now!
Poor little Pumpkin souls, voiceless innocent fruits, mass murdered for a whimsical celebration.

@Seek_Kolinahr someone who spells it “flavoured” is more likely to abide by the rules of Shakespere: anything goes

I’ve known far more Americans in favour of ‘creative spelling’ than any other nationality.

That would be the way we do it in the trailour park.

English English speakers spell it spelt and learnt and favour

I thought it was the trailourhood?

@tom_g to say that your question got derailed was to admit that it was, at one point, railed.
Which it wasn’t by the time of the first answer.

I think it’s safe to say you are all guilty of ignoring the chocolate chip crisis we face in our ice cream shops. Harumph!

Mint chocolate chip.

Does not count and you know it

Mouther foucker!!

Still thinking about this question and remembered, as a kid I loved butterscotch sundaes (the butterscotch had to be warm, of course), and the thought of it still gives me pleasure. But alas, it’s too rich and sweet for me now. Plus, today’s butterscotch doesn’t taste as good to me as it once did.