3 ms·
> you seem to think a concept like "higher power" is easy to translate. I have no idea why you think I have any position on the ease or otherwise of 'translati
by robotresearcher 10y ago
> you seem to think a concept like "higher power" is easy to translate.
I have no idea why you think I have any position on the ease or otherwise of 'translating' this term. I've made no claim about that. I read the article in good faith. 'Higher being' is the term they chose. I assume it's the best term available to the author. I'm not arguing about it. I'm just not persuaded that depression is a call from a higher being, as far as I understand what they are getting at.
- SomeStupidPoint 10y agoBut my exact point is I don't think you understand what they're getting at if you think the two views are incompatible. (Which you said you were pretty sure of, up thread.) If you don't actually understand what they're getting at, you being pretty sure the views are incompatible results from misevaluating how well you understand what they're saying -- hence the discussion of why that communication is hard. Which is why I asked you to elaborate on why you think the views are incompatible. Which you declined to do. So I'm not really sure what else to say if you don't want to get in to specifics of how you interpreted the concept and why you think the two models are incompatible.
- robotresearcher 10y agoI didn't claim they were incompatible. Since nothing is incompatible with the existence of a supernatural higher being, that would be obviously wrong. I said they weren't equivalent, and earlier I asked which explanation is more likely.