Mental shuffles [I Have Thoughts]
I am grateful to the existence of religion, and my history with it, it in part informs or luxuriates my thought process. Earlier here expressed a wish to be a vessel of vengeance, and what that would mean. Here i'd like to extrapolate on such a musing.
1st off it would be paradoxical to be in a rightful position to wield an authoratative position on anything. If i were to seemingly do that, it could only be as a reactionary way of commenting on hypocrisy, which would also be hypocritical, but through a sliver of good faith in that if the message gets across that it would help push further in myself and others a more rigorous dispaying and purposive expression of truth.
What momentarily including religion in a quasi realistic manner entails is a mental shuffle where it then dusts you off from your usual point of view, it doesn't mean you logically go more in depth and in favor of the shuffler statement, but it reawakens your thinking to the contingencies involved in those kinds of topics.
Things that time honored thinkers could not and dared not come up with quick pat answers to.
From being hypothetical, i breathe some fresh air, i thank any and all feedback, like the one i chatted briefly in the aforementioned post. The last comment suggested i quit being hypothetical and be clear sighted enough to be clearly for something.
I appreciate that for sure, but i retain my hypothetical nature, for reasons that can be expunged from earlier here, which i will re-phrase now.
To realistically do what i would wish would either mean the impossible or an act of heightened foolishness.
To then wonder out loud about what could be, or what couldn't, leaves open spaces, where further things at my discretion can be added to or not. Things not pertaining to a solidifying of the actuality of such things said, but further inquiries into areas that will also in turn function as furthering places.
About 67% of this is accurate. The rest is whimsy.
1st off it would be paradoxical to be in a rightful position to wield an authoratative position on anything. If i were to seemingly do that, it could only be as a reactionary way of commenting on hypocrisy, which would also be hypocritical, but through a sliver of good faith in that if the message gets across that it would help push further in myself and others a more rigorous dispaying and purposive expression of truth.
What momentarily including religion in a quasi realistic manner entails is a mental shuffle where it then dusts you off from your usual point of view, it doesn't mean you logically go more in depth and in favor of the shuffler statement, but it reawakens your thinking to the contingencies involved in those kinds of topics.
Things that time honored thinkers could not and dared not come up with quick pat answers to.
From being hypothetical, i breathe some fresh air, i thank any and all feedback, like the one i chatted briefly in the aforementioned post. The last comment suggested i quit being hypothetical and be clear sighted enough to be clearly for something.
I appreciate that for sure, but i retain my hypothetical nature, for reasons that can be expunged from earlier here, which i will re-phrase now.
To realistically do what i would wish would either mean the impossible or an act of heightened foolishness.
To then wonder out loud about what could be, or what couldn't, leaves open spaces, where further things at my discretion can be added to or not. Things not pertaining to a solidifying of the actuality of such things said, but further inquiries into areas that will also in turn function as furthering places.
About 67% of this is accurate. The rest is whimsy.