Posted by 5 on March 2, 2006, at 18:42:01
In reply to For FIVE, posted by Gabbix2 on March 2, 2006, at 16:23:35
This virtual model of the world had to have sense
Because if it didn't
Then it is more likely that the world doesn't have sense either.And so that is important to me.
There has to be a sense
Otherwise there is just the brute indifference of the universe
And the existentialists had a point.And so I tried to see the sense
And others thought I engaged in convoluted rationalisations
And maybe I did
Maybe I did
But it was important to me
Because if there isn't sense here
Then what hope for reality?
And I refuse to believe the world is that way...And yeah, that led to conflict.
When others proclaim there is no sense
And I refuse to believe them
Engage in rationalisations
JustificationsBut hurt...
I dealt with it before. Could see the sense.
But this time it is different.
The case might well be analogous to last time
(There was a thought that it was simply the same thing again)
And I can see the analogy
But instead of the justification (the rationalisation) transmitting from that case to this
The lack of justification for this case is transmitting back to the last case
And I don't see the sense there either.And Larrys block...
I don't see the sense there either.
Now...
I do not.And that might well be a good thing.
Because seeing the sense leads to conflict on the boards
Seeing the sense led to conflict
And conflict is bad because it interfeares with the supportive mission of this site
So it is good for me to not see the sense
To fall in line with the majority
Outliers result in conflict
Better to come into line or be curbed
Better for the supportive mission of this site.But what cost to me?
First there was five...
Now there are six.
Because there has to be a sense you see...
There has to be a sense for my majority
Because otherwise...
Otherwise...
Kill me now
Because We can't handle the truth.And that is about as big a battle as you can get.
And the big ones get away
Because they are beyond critique
Because critique is not supportive
And if you critique a political ideology
If you citique a government
Then it seems that people are entitled to take it personally...What if someone critiques a medication?
What if someone critiques a brand of therapy?
What if someone critiques a famous person?
An ideology (not related to politics)?
Are people entitled to take it personally?
Aka... Will people be blocked?American bias goes further than you think...
What you are entitled to take personally...
People take politics personally...
Is that warranted or should people learn not to?Nationalism...
Interesting.
poster:5
thread:615038
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20060221/msgs/615083.html