The purpose of 'new age' spirituality?

Originally Posted by Baile

That's not a wrong statement, that's their belief. Whereas "The sun rises in the west" is a wrong statement. It's really quite easy as I see it. One can:

1. State their opinion.
2. Tell someone they're wrong.
3. Accuse someone of being ignorant.

If people simply stuck to the first option, there would be no need for moderators on these internet forums.

We are in complete agreement on this point. I (likewise) think we should try to avoid the all too human tendency to use blanket statements.

I know I have been swept away (from time to time) by heated conversations--regarding differences of opinion--this is why I try to proof-read my posts more than once.

[Touched]

Originally Posted by LadyTerra

We are in complete agreement on this point. I (likewise) think we should try to avoid the all too human tendency to use blanket statements.

Always?

Originally Posted by Baile

That's not a wrong statement, that's their belief. Whereas "The sun rises in the west" is a wrong statement. It's really quite easy as I see it. One can:

1. State their opinion.
2. Tell someone they're wrong.
3. Accuse someone of being ignorant.

If people simply stuck to the first option, there would be no need for moderators on these internet forums.

ETA: Looking at the post you refer to...where did I say it was a "wrong statement"? I think you got a bit mixed up, reading something that isn't there!


I'm surprised at you.... comparing an established fact (in that we commonly recognise terms of "east" and "west") and the sun rising and setting occurs regardless of the observer, with a hypothesis that doesn't work for the reason I stated. The comment I quoted is not a fact but was presented as if it should be one.

If we stuck to your first option, there'd be no discussion....and therefore, no need for a forum.

Originally Posted by Touched

Always?

I liken it to stereo-typing. I have (personally) found myself in heated discussion and fallen into the trap of using blanket statements.

One of the main reasons that I enjoy message boards--so much--is that they afford me an opportunity to review what I am trying to say--before posting.

We are only human--everybody makes mistakes. However--I have noticed that occasionally I cross paths with some who believe themselves to be infallible. LOL

Must be nice to be perfect--but I seriously doubt that I ever will be.

[Touched]

Originally Posted by Lorelyen

Can't agree. It's a belief but it comes across as a statement of fact. "Always". Sorry my friend, I can't help how the syntax and semantics of language work.

I've found the crux of the issue to be just what the definition of 'is' is...

Originally Posted by Lorelyen

If we stuck to your first option, there'd be no discussion....and therefore, no need for a forum.

That's a good point.

[r6r6]

Originally Posted by Lorelyen

.."comparing an established fact (in that we commonly recognise terms of "east" and "west") and the sun rising and setting occurs regardless of the observer, with a hypothesis that doesn't work for the reason I stated.

Sure we know what is meant, however, that is a relative truth.

The sun does not rise or set. The sun is becoming visible-- sun sight -- in the east because Earth is spinning and the horizon is declination(?) falling(?) setting(?).

The sun becomes clipsed in the evening by the Earth spinning ergo rising(?) inclination(?) horizon.

Many if not most of our truths used in every day language are relative truths.

Blanket = generalization = steroetype = least refined(?).

Old age Spirit = ?-- vitality -- maybe to have a visualization or expression of our spirit

New age spirit = Spirit-3( gravitational essence ), Spirit-2( physical/energy as fermions and bosons ), Spirit-1( metaphysical spirit-of-intent ). imho

r6

Originally Posted by Touched

I've found the crux of the issue to be just what the definition of 'is' is...

Apologies, I edited my post. I couldn't recall any reference to a wrong statement and indeed I had made no such claim. But your quoting me still holds good.

I wish the sun would rise in the west tomorrow as it always used to.

[Touched]

Originally Posted by LadyTerra

I liken it to stereo-typing. I have (personally) found myself in heated discussion and fallen into the trap of using blanket statements.

One of the main reasons that I enjoy message boards--so much--is that they afford me an opportunity to review what I am trying to say--before posting.

We are only human--everybody makes mistakes. However--I have noticed that occasionally I cross paths with some who believe themselves to be infallible. LOL

Must be nice to be perfect--but I seriously doubt that I ever will be.

Yes, I think some people take great comfort in their infallibility. Must be nice.

[Touched]

Originally Posted by Lorelyen

Apologies, I edited my post. I couldn't recall any reference to a wrong statement and indeed I had made no such claim. But your quoting me still holds good.

I wish the sun would rise in the west tomorrow as it always used to.

LOL

.

[Baile]

Originally Posted by Lorelyen

I'm surprised at you.... comparing an established fact (in that we commonly recognise terms of "east" and "west") and the sun rising and setting occurs regardless of the observer, with a hypothesis that doesn't work for the reason I stated. The comment I quoted is not a fact but was presented as if it should be one.

The comment you quoted (anger being fear-based) was stated as fact by the individual who stated it. To them it's fact. To you it isn't. You can tell them they're wrong, sure. But it doesn't mean they're wrong. And in truth, the idea that all anger is fear-based, is quite probably more true that not.

On the other hand, the sun rising in the west cannot be argued as fact by anyone. It's just wrong. That's the difference.