Ms.Welliver, I have been following along as this discussion has slowly progressed through the day, and i cant help but notice some distinct things that just sort of, leap to my attention as i read this recent attack of yours. And i do use the word "attack" in its fullest sense, ripe with the implication of malevolent intent, for it seems to me, through the course of my several re-readings of your "argument," that the majority of your case is founded (if it can be described as such) in unsupported allegations pertaining to the thoughts and intentions of your opponent. I fail to see how you could possibly know that she has "always doubted it," as you are not her, and that is the sort of thing that we have to take people words about. Just as i could say that you are obviously lying when you tell your fanciful yarn about benevolent clouds, and malevolent shadows, i do not. To assert that you are lying would be to assume a level of knowledge about your state of mind that i frankly cannot know, and as such, all i can do, is state it to be a possibility. just as i will state that there is the possibility that you are conveying your experiences accurately. In the former, i do not understand your motivation, and in the latter, your motivation does not matter, as you were evidently delusional at the time that you had the experience. For you see, what you have described is nonsense, how can you “experience” a world that is not physical in nature? Are not all of your senses rooted in reality? Do your eyes not detect photons, as mine do? Do your nerves react do different stimuli than mine? Where in your concretely physical body, is the sense organ that interacts with the intangible? It is in that question that i have laid a trap for you, because there is no answer to that question; if you can in any way, shape or form, interact with it, then it is most evidently not intangible; that is not a point that we can debate, it is merely a matter if definitions. Already at this point, we have ruled out all scenarios in which your story holds weight as is; it can only continue if you radically redefine various parts of it, which would be tantamount to forfeiture, and an admission of falsification. Alternatively, you could persist with the story that you have already placed on the table, which would merely confirm the notion that your mental faculties are in some way lacking. So the choice of which course to take is up to you, and i eagerly await, to find out what you decide the verdict is. Also, if you try to fight back with any sort of cop out argument revolving around how you think that I'm closed minded, and because i don't explicitly believe exactly what you believe, that i can therefore never understand, all i have to say is this: fucking grow the fuck up. If that is the best response that you can find to someone else's point, then you have obviously lost, and would be better respected if you would admit that at the least you cannot properly convey your point, and cannot continue. The way that you have chosen is just poor sportsmanship, and relatively easily overturned: did you “always” believe exactly what you believe now? I'm willing to bet that you didn't. How then, did you gain this understanding of the “spiritual world?” evidently, it is something that can be understood be a non believer. I'm not closed minded, I'm just fucking sick and tired of “spiritual people” running wild, and spouting their nonsensical, unsupported by any facts, ideas and beliefs, and then, when they are not embraced by the mainstream, crying to themselves about the bigotry and intolerance of the world, and how no one has an open mind, and everything like that. Let me tell you this, and this will be my last point: everyone else out here, in the real world, with any idea of how things actually are; we do have open minds, they are wide open, taking in the world that we can touch, and see, and hear, and we are basing our beliefs around what we find there, not in our imaginations; our minds are wide open, wider than yours could ever be.
--Ricecake.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

No comments:
Post a Comment