Re: Betrayel

On Mon, 12 Aug 2024 15:24:16 +0100, % <[email protected]> wrote:

> one wrote:
>> slider wrote:
>>> someone wrote:
>>
>>>> Whether all people who have what is called schizophrenia
>>>> or some people would be able to have more lucid dreams
>>>> and contribute to a culture sounds like a fine topic.
>>>
>>> ### - i think so too... but that's only one example because the overall
>>> premise included 'other' kinds of mental illness too as thus  
>>> 'potentially'
>>> being closer to an altered state on a daily basis compared to the  
>>> average
>>> man in the street, that being my whole point from the start but which  
>>> you
>>> were refusing to even hear without continually changing the subject,  
>>> there
>>> being nada about what am suggesting that warrants such evasion, and  
>>> which
>>> cued my objection to you screwing around for nada...
>>  Sorry about your agenda being derailed. It was unintentional.
>> There was no, refusal, to hear what you wrote, nor evasion.
>> You are projecting, imo, on to words seen on screnes.
>>  As for a conversation,
>> I might like to say, at this point, to continue,
>> that to say the average man in the street
>> is what constitutes an unaltered state
>> suggests many connotations
>> and permutations to me.
>>  My guess, at this point, is that you are uninterested
>> in discussing to a fine point what constitutes an altered state
>> as well as who is the average man in the street.
>>  If so, skip the next two paragraphs.
>>  The so-called average man in the street, imo, experiences
>> many altered states from when awakening to returning to
>> a state of unconsciousness. Throughout the week he goes
>> from state to state naturally as the days unfold.
>>  What then, is an unaltered state, could be a question.
>> Is there a state beyond which there are no more states.
>> Does a state of cosmic or, as the OP may state, Christ
>> consciousness exist. And can people who are or have
>> been diagnosed with a variety of mental illnesses be
>> more near to such an ultimate state than so-called
>> others, like the average man in the street.
>>  Is there a point to WILD beyond imagination?
>>
>>> that what the OP originally said/suggested was indeed a generalisation,
>>> but that doesn't detract from its content being interesting and/or
>>> containing a facet of truth, and didn't deserve being slammed out of  
>>> hand
>>> (unnecessarily rudely i might add)
>>  Agree.
>>
>>> i mean, what gives you (or anyone come to that) the right to punch  
>>> people
>>> in the face for something they're saying or commenting on like that??
>>  Usenet newsgroups tend to grant such a right. Trolling,
>> flames and w'hat knots basically are par for the course.
>>
>>> especially if what they're saying/suggesting has some merit to it!?
>>> (merit, you've just agreed, would be nice)
>>  Some people don't understand how social media
>> may not be the best place to publish thoughts
>> in terms of going without what goes with
>> posting material in groups, especially
>> unmoderated Usenet groups.
>>
>>> no, it was done out of something 'other' than rational debate, it was  
>>> done
>>> out of cruelty and spite tinged with personal hatred and in my book  
>>> that
>>> kind of bs is bang out of order, especially when the OP is from my  
>>> group
>>> and is being attacked for what is ultimately a fairly intelligent
>>> comment/observation (we deal in 'all' subjects here at alt.dreams
>>> castaneda, everything in this world & beyond is part of life so no  
>>> subject
>>> is taboo, indeed one has to cover everything that is/exists or it's
>>> clearly not complete)
>>  Cross-posting may invite more comments.
>>  - thanks! Cheers!
>>
> you type funny

### - perhaps he's outgrown you? ;)