Edg, excellent post. I couldn't agree more. You can always count on the fanatical nihilists of FFLife to tromp on the tender feelings of people trying to find a way to heal, attacking with such fervor and certainty, it's as if they're promoting a cause in the name of religion...Atheism? Nihilists don't believe in healing, they believe in picking a scab.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <no_re...@...> wrote: > > For you folks who think that Dan's suicide was crazy nuts and are rather high > strung about how New Agers are waxing on about Dan, I'm asking if you see > that that's a religious position. Meaning that you're displaying values > which, like religious values, are matters of faith much more than fact. > > I have, say, three, four, five and who knows how many more theories about > what happens after death, and given your alarm about Dan, the atmosphere for > discussion here is seriously dampened. Edification here? Sure.... > > Why would anyone try to get closure here with some sort of framing about Dan > that they can abide with? No matter the theory, someone here is sure to > stompsmashshit on it. This is not a healing place now is it? > > That's the bane of FFL -- you have to be a fool to post anything that your > heart is (perhaps temporarily yes) resonating with. > > This place is great at rending, and that's a service I've benefited often and > deeply from, because, yah, I gots delusions like the next guy, and one can > get rapidly sandpapered here, but this righteous anger about the > closure-memes of the New Agers seems tawdry -- like someone shouting out "He > went to hell" at Dan's funeral. > > Given the black tragedies of the world, Dan's pales to ecru. On the Earth we > have 60,000,000 people with IQs over 140 -- geniuses all -- yet Gaia is in > such deep despair. Get it? Figuring out Dan's why-whats would have been > figured if it could have been figured at all and figured thousands of years > ago and be yet seen being taught in hieroglyphics or live desert scrolls > whatever. > > This is a time for deep consideration, but such cannot happen if one's > explorations into this unknown are relentlessly scoffed at by FFL's dolts and > atheists and smarm lords. (Pick yer slot! If you're angry, choose "dolt.") > > And don't you see that this is exactly the world's attitude towards Dan-types > who make untoward proclamations? As much as the handcuffing expectations of > New Agers may have painted Dan into a psychological corner he could not bear, > far more massively did the world at large have this negativity -- a > resistance -- that presented itself as impermeable as the Berlin Wall. > > The sheer certainty behind the rancor of the anti-New Agers is the exact snag > that Dan helped me confront in my own philosophical prejudices. We are as if > finding faces in the clouds and then yelling at each other for being > ridiculous only to see every interpretation become rapidly invalid by the > winds above. That's the amness that is the divine Rorschach upon which all > conceptuals are projected, and Dan taught that this parsing of reality was > the problem -- it was this "Adam complex" in which one is naming all the > beasts, and that keeps Adam thinking he's Adam-the-namer donchasee? > > Down with certainty!!!! A concept is a crime against infinity. >
