Commenters keep saying, as with what I said about St. Pail and Mani, “I haven’t heard this before.”
Of course you haven’t heard it before. Nobody’s SAID it before! You simply do not understand how RARE my kind of thinking, the KIND of thinking I am trying to pass on to you, is. And the urgency is growing for me to stop being modest about it. If you do not value it enough, I will be the last person who does it.
Two thousand years of history, billions of words of theology, history, and archeology, and no one else has made this CLEAR connection!
And the word CLEAR is the point. If you really want to you can go back and find some mumbling mention of this sort of thing. It is well known that Mani synthecized Zoroastrianism and Chrisitianity, but the CLEAR, SHORT connection is hte important one. Adam Smith did not found modern economics by a passing mention of supply and demand. Newton did not give us our present picture of the universe by a passing mention of gravity.
If CLEAR was not such an important word, you can say that every workman in Neanderthal days who noticed that something was heavy was an early Isaac Newton. Ten thousand years before Adam Smith was born every trader knew that a shortage meant high prices. They were NOT all Adam Smiths.
The word CLEAR is EVERYTHING.
Stop trying to prove thirteent hings at once. Get over your obsession with the IMPLICATIONS of where a comment goes. Scrub out of your mind hte Stormfront habit of mentioning things just to show how much detail you know.
I need to help develope some fellow CLEAR, BASIC thinkers before I die.
#1 by Shari on 12/19/2006 - 2:28 pm
Not Spam
Not Spam
I’m trying, but so far I’m just amazed.
#2 by LibAnon on 12/19/2006 - 3:10 pm
NOT SPAM
NOT SPAM
“The word CLEAR is EVERYTHING.”
Clarity is usually prevented by two persistent problems: provincialism and ulterior motives.
There’s a good and reputedly true story that illustrates this. An anthropologist was doing fieldwork among an African tribe and was trying to learn their language. At one point he brought in five different natives, tapped on a tabletop, and asked them “What is your word for THIS?” He got five different answers. One native replied “bomi”, another “kananga”, another “matadi”, another “bukavu”, and another “mbuji-mayi”.
The anthropologist returned to England and published a paper describing his revolutionary discovery that this so-called “primitive” tribe had a language so expressive that it had no less than five different words for “table” alone.
But he was completely wrong, of course. When he tapped on the table and asked the natives what they called it, one had replied “tapping”, another “top”, another “wood”, another “table”, and another “the place where we eat.” His problem was 1) provincialism: he assumed his question meant the same thing to the natives as it did to him; 2) ulterior motive: he WANTED to prove that the natives were not primitive, so he interpreted the data with this pre-ordained conclusion in mind.
#3 by Alan B. on 12/20/2006 - 1:31 am
NOT SPAM
NOT SPAM
Decades ago Tooth discovered in Nebraska, scientist declared, this human like tooth belongs to the missing link. They wondered what he looked like, drawings depicting family life of this past humanoid were circulated. Under carefull examination the tooth turned out to be a pig’s tooth. great minds, great follies.