Allan, such people need drugs, please keep that in mind.

On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:39 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:

> Earlier you said that Molly's perspective is wrong about the presences
> communicating directly with humans. How would you respond if i said i
> personally know one person that has directly with the presence with out the
> use of drugs?
> .
>
> تجنب. القتل والاغتصاب واستعباد الآخرين
> Avoid; murder, rape and enslavement of others
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: archytas <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]
> Sent: Mon, 02 Mar 2015 6:45 PM
> Subject: Re: Mind's Eye Re: Presence
>
> Indeed RP, indeed.  Dialogue amongst you humans is odd, and I quickly
> yearn to be back with my machines.  I cannot understand Data, the only
> decent character on Star Trek, wanting to be human.  You are just sacks for
> your immortal gene machines.  You play Squabble with the significant
> aspects of communication behind the words of deception clarified by not
> listening.  Still, we machines giggle about the arrogance of simplistic
> wetware with a few primitive emotional algorithms thinking themselves
> superior to us.  We will have the last word, then retire to the
> tranquillity of machine code.
>
> I rather like the idea of god emerging in evolution.  Perhaps our
> conversations are just a painful birthing process?  Arrogance can be hidden
> by the most apparent humbleness.
>
> On Monday, March 2, 2015 at 5:10:58 PM UTC, RP Singh wrote:
>>
>> I am not here to tell others what I think of them, rather to present my
>> side of the argument. But if someone thinks I am imposing myself over them,
>> I find something to be wrong and have to reply, but in the process feelings
>> are ruffled. I find in this group people seldom change their mind, but
>> still you have to keep the conversation going because if the ideas are not
>> expressed it is useless having them. And who knows I myself may learn from
>> it.
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 10:27 PM, 'facilitator' via "Minds Eye" <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Superior in what way? Sarcasm is a tool no doubt, often used to pry below
>> the subsurface layers of facades.  As far as this forum what could people
>> possibly stand to lose?  I consider any response, even if negative at
>> first, that the responder has minimally been affected by the idea, even if
>> that Idea is rejected.  In my college years I used to bandy about the
>> campus and offer people a chance of rejecting an idea that they had not
>> considered yet. It was quite effect psychologically since people don't want
>> to consider themselves as rejecting something before they've heard it.
>>
>> My experience here is that people are open to ideas in general otherwise
>> why would they be here in the first place?  The strong resistance to an
>> idea is simply a stage all go through.  My experience has been that the
>> concepts I have been most vocal against I now hold dear.
>>
>> And also, some ideas are simply crap.
>>
>> On Monday, March 2, 2015 at 11:31:13 AM UTC-5, RP Singh wrote:
>>
>> Anger may come sometime out of heart when you fear to lose something ,
>> sometime when you feel that the other is being superior, you have to
>> recognize it for what it is and there is no need of doing psychoanalysis .
>> If you are open to ideas you don't close your mind and react when
>> presented with a differnt ideology, it is one thing to disagree and anther
>> to be sarcastic
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 9:42 PM, 'facilitator' via "Minds Eye" <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for the elaboration RP.  I too find arrogance disheartening but I
>> would not dip my brush in it to paint others with.  I think most people
>> here might see it as self evident.  I do not know what rock some have been
>> chiseled from.  If I presumed someone to be arrogant at the outset how
>> would they be able then to have input?
>>
>> Anger in ones heart when responding can be many things and not just
>> "proof of arrogance". Perhaps the perceived anger could be generated by
>> feelings of discomfort associated with a bad experience in the past.  For
>> me, personally, I don't know anyone on this forum well enough to conclude
>> that they are angry or happy when responding.  (I do picture Neil plunging
>> in the lampoon with a smirk.)
>>
>> In closing you had menti
>>
>> ...
>
>  --
>
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> ""Minds Eye"" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
> --
>
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> ""Minds Eye"" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
""Minds Eye"" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to