juantoo3
....whys guy.... ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb
OK, my turn...
You scare me sometimes with your replies, it's almost like you are reading my mind.
About "superior versus inferior," in the context of Interfaith discussion, I do think there is a better, or at least more appropriately suited, level of consideration....and in fact that is from the position of "ideas." Does that make others wrong? I suppose that isn't a given, but it does seem to present some serious challenges that I seldom see overcome here, or anywhere.
Wil, leave it to you to uncover "the rest of the story." I have no argument, and certainly the position you add fleshes out and enhances any discussion, but I sense you knew this wouldn't be about Ms. Roosevelt in the first place....and of course it isn't.
Thomas! "Is it people who bring ideas to life, or do ideas animate people ... or is that a chicken/egg, nature/nurture type of thing?" How profound and astute! I would guess each person here would have their own take on this, but it also factors in considerably to what I had hoped to come forth. Obviously to me, ideas come "from" people, without a reasoning mind the concept of "idea" has no meaning...but still, ideas can animate people. I don't think this is an either/or answer, both are "true," in every application of that term.
Everyone else's responses only add new dimensions and wrinkles to the consideration of the question. In that sense, this is a model of discussing ideas...and this is the kind of model that serves well in Interfaith discussion. I am welcome to being proven wrong, but I don't personally see how the other models of discussing from the aspect of people or events can form any better basis for Interfaith discussion.
You scare me sometimes with your replies, it's almost like you are reading my mind.
About "superior versus inferior," in the context of Interfaith discussion, I do think there is a better, or at least more appropriately suited, level of consideration....and in fact that is from the position of "ideas." Does that make others wrong? I suppose that isn't a given, but it does seem to present some serious challenges that I seldom see overcome here, or anywhere.
Wil, leave it to you to uncover "the rest of the story." I have no argument, and certainly the position you add fleshes out and enhances any discussion, but I sense you knew this wouldn't be about Ms. Roosevelt in the first place....and of course it isn't.
Thomas! "Is it people who bring ideas to life, or do ideas animate people ... or is that a chicken/egg, nature/nurture type of thing?" How profound and astute! I would guess each person here would have their own take on this, but it also factors in considerably to what I had hoped to come forth. Obviously to me, ideas come "from" people, without a reasoning mind the concept of "idea" has no meaning...but still, ideas can animate people. I don't think this is an either/or answer, both are "true," in every application of that term.
Everyone else's responses only add new dimensions and wrinkles to the consideration of the question. In that sense, this is a model of discussing ideas...and this is the kind of model that serves well in Interfaith discussion. I am welcome to being proven wrong, but I don't personally see how the other models of discussing from the aspect of people or events can form any better basis for Interfaith discussion.
