Btw Hank I agree with many points you've made in this thread. I've been filling in bits I've skipped and just found the "smoking gun" site.
Interesting. And I checked, AA posted bits of it word for word in his original post. That's plagiarism and I find it dishonest. I also find that
he's apt to be a bit rude... but hey, he's getting flamed.
On the other hand, if you're really a cut above the rest of us spiritually, you'd take it in your stride, wouldn't you?
I think that's a point you yourself made earlier in the thread. Jeez, sixty-plus pages. There are still things I'm trying to get to grips with
here. However, on to our little side note...
Originally posted by HankMcCoy
You're extremely vehement on this point. How do you know? On what basis do you make the distinction?
On the same basis that you cant use a baseball bat in a football game.
Hank. I expected more of you. You don't have to play AA's game, and I don't think you are, in fact, either. Other people on this thread are
playing his game, you're trying to disrupt it - and don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing you shouldn't.
However, what we laughingly call reality is too rich and complex to be bound by the rules of a game, and to treat it as such is what philosophers
call, or so I believe, a "category mistake".
You're trying to impose strict game-based rules on something that's way too slippery. Good luck.
This is AA's game, and as such, I am playing by HIS rules. AA claims this is about Aliens, and as such, it is about Aliens, NOT spirituality.
We have boards to discuss topics of spiritual matters.
I said that this topic straddles both categories. You actually haven't given me a reason why it can't, and I have given you several historical
instances in which it clearly does. I'm sorry, but referring to games just doesn't cut it. I'm not playing any kind of game here, I have no
vested interest in AA's viewpoint. I'm just curious as to why you're so vehement that something that clearly does happen (a crossover between the
two categories of aliens and spirituality) "CAN'T".
If you choose to reply, please try to bear in mind that I actually don't have any fixed beliefs on the subject, other than recognising that there
are plenty of people out there who provide testimonial evidence of a crossover between the two categories
. Now if you want to argue that, say,
Aleister Crowley or Whitley Streiber never existed and didn't write their books, please go ahead. However, I don't think this is tenable and
consequently I will press the point that the distinction that you're insisting on is unhelpful and actually may be impeding your ability to process
the data surrounding the subject.
Let's try another tack.
Let's say, for argument's sake, that aliens do indeed exist.
Let's further say, again for argument's sake, that humans have a spiritual aspect to their nature.
IF we accept these first two propositions, then why should aliens NOT have a spiritual side to their nature?
I mean, I just don't get where you're coming from on this whole thing, Hank. AA's talking about telepathic contact with aliens. And you want to
knock the whole thing down because some people are bringing spirituality into it? Once you bring a meditative process into play, you are moving into
an area historically associated with spirituality. That is
factually correct, isn't it?
Ok, AA used the word proof, and I'm not happy with that. But from my reading of the thread some people seem to be getting something out of it. I'm
interested to see how it develops.
As far as I can tell, logically you can only object to this if you either
- have a strong belief aliens don't exist
- have a strong belief that human spirituality is bunk
- have a strong belief that while aliens might exist, they cannot have a spiritual dimension
Does one of these options characterise your position?
[edit on 22-11-2006 by rich23]