ummm...ok? lol I was just trying to clarify something, since not everyone knows, and you didn't explicitly say what I said in regards to what law of attraction itself states. I apologize? lol. You sad you don't know how what I said disagrees with what you said. Things don't have to be an argument, or even a debate. I'm not sure why people think that this forum is just a place to argue and debate. What happened to regular conversation?
I know this type of debate can get very grotesque in size and seem outwardly to be pointless, but I would insist it is not. Even if it's semantics (which I don't think it is, I think it's a different of epistemological methodology), we're exchanging how our linguistic description is, to us, an accurate description of the world. Please don't discourage it, exchanging ideas is the prize goal of the internet. We're getting close to achieving something on both sides.
Some people have to debate and argue about this because some are passionate about this subjects others could think it's bullshit but that's seems pretty human to me since everyone has a different perception and view in this life time everyone is unique too this world cuz there wouldn't be another u following ur path or goal as a spirit
At the end of the day Sam_Spade the debate breaks down because our epistemological methodologies rest on a series of very different tenants. It does come down to semantics a lot of the time too, but only as a result of the prior difference. As you correctly note, we are seemingly approaching a crunch point, and it will be interesting to see which side prevails, or whether 21st century breakthroughs in physics can to an extent reconcile science with spirituality. We can only wait and see, until then sir toke on!
You're absolutely right, that's usually the crux of the matter. And I cannot fault you for holding differences here, if these systems we use are different, then it's means we won't always come to the same conclusions. That's the thing though, epistemological ideas don't HAVE to be in conflict. We can debate them without it becoming a "who wins" or "who is right" scenario. I think exchanging ideas is the defining component of strengthening our individual outlook. Maybe that's the dichotomy, I dunno. Also; science and spirituality do not have to be opposed to one another. They are a part of the same motivations. The same drive brings us to our conclusions on understanding the Universe. In my view, science doesn't bring us away from spirituality, but rather enables us to understand it. I passionately find beauty in the processes of the natural world, even if sometimes it deflates our expectations. I have a thread going about this very subject right now, I encourage you to check it out! Right back at ya, buddy!
I'm not saying it should be an argument. I just think that when people say "yes, but" it sounds like they are partially agreeing and making an attempt to correct something. I just didn't get what the "but" meant when it usually serves as a segway to a counter argument. I guess its a little bit confusing when someone says "yes, but" and they really mean "yes, and". Know what I mean? No hard feelings. I'm just over-thinking shit as usual.
"but" can also be used as a means of clarifying something, as opposed to correcting something. "Blacks make up a higher percentage of the criminal population, particularly relative to the racial population." "Yes, but it does not necessarily imply that they do these crimes more. When you factor in..." The 2nd person is not disagreeing with the factual statement the 1st person made, but wants to clarify something he, or someone reading it, may not have consdered. But it's cool. Definitely no hard feelings