[quote=inavalan]
- What I believe isn't based on rationalization, it isn't borrowed from any guru or dogma (maybe 80% is in agreement with Seth, but I din't borrow anything from there either). So, there can only be a conversation of statements and some explanations, no justifications, no corrections, and, as I wrote, I don't intend to convince anybody.
. - I didn't get agitated.
[/QUOTE
1) Rationalization? That is an interesting choice of word. Often used in a negative connotation, but not necessarily so. Much of what I believe is based on rationally looking at facts, scientific theories, and philosophies and then projecting from there to form my own hypotheses of what it all might imply. I have begged, borrowed, and stole from countless sources of facts, opinions, philosophies, and theories of others over the years to build my own theories and beliefs. Never much cared what particular title or following they had, although I suppose scientist or philosopher does carry some weight with me. I expect I may even have invented something new here and there. Of course one never can tell what may have been squirreled away at one time or another in the deeper recesses of the mind,
only to pop up later stripped of its citation. Seth is a rather new source of ideas to me but I do like what I have read so far. Interestingly, many of the things Seth claims are conclusions that I had already reached by other means. Conclusions I would have once dismissed out of hand.
2) Of course, I also have my beliefs formed directly through my own experiences in life as well. The two are intertwined and sometimes the latter are supported well by the former, and sometimes I can’t find a strong scientific or theoretical basis in the former to support the latter, but that is ok. Maybe someday I will have the facts and theories with which to rationalize those experiential based beliefs, maybe not. I do occasionally express those latter beliefs on this forum, but I can’t expect anyone to just accept them because I say I had this or that experience. Yet some do become agitated if you don’t just accept them when they say
..”believe me, I know, I have experienced it, when you are as advanced as me you will understand, yada yada yada”..
Their claims of experience may not be nonsense, but their expectation that others simply accept them as fact, IMO, is. Anyway, I do occasionally run across such individuals and that was my point. I didn't mean to imply that you yourself had become agitated. It is just a general observation about what seems like an odd expectation of some who do. Of course, I suspect that their reactions are often a subconsciously generated argument tactic, rather than true agitation about not having their beliefs based only on their personal experience accepted as a fact by me, but all I know is they seem to protest when they, IMO, have nothing to protest about.
All that said, I have to admit that I have become annoyed at those who simply deny my experiential beliefs, or even conjectured beliefs based on facts and hypotheses, with no curiosity at all as to what might be behind them. Simply repeatedly yelling bullsht at something does not pass as a counter argument and says more about the person than the idea they are criticizing.
.