Offlein

joined 2 years ago
[–] Offlein 1 points 1 year ago

Patches by Dickie Lee or Patches by Clarence Carter?

... Or Patches the Clown by Deadbolt?

(All great songs.)

[–] Offlein 0 points 1 year ago

Hmm that part really was the only thing that resonated with me.

[–] Offlein 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Holy fuck

... It doesn't even make sense. If Sue ends up choosing to live life as a flamboyant, gay drag queen then why is Sue pissed off at the dad in the first place? 🤔

[–] Offlein 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What's so sad is that those corporations are just pumping out waste and pollution for the fun of it, and not because they are providing goods and services that are very important for us to continue living the way we are comfortable living.

...

[–] Offlein 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

... you are correct that if I'm unfamiliar with your terminology, I will not know what you mean.

You are incorrect that if I understand the definition of a "partial Kundalini awakening" I will not have a shared understanding. I can't imagine why that would be true.

[–] Offlein 1 points 1 year ago

If by spiritual you mean "hurt my teeth" then sometimes eating ice cream is spiritual for me.

Otherwise, I'm not sure what spiritual means, as I said.

[–] Offlein 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I also agree, because we all pretty much understand what "happy" means.

No one seems to understand what "spiritual" means with any definition, and hence we shouldn't just be using it like we do, in my opinion.

Apparently for you it means "gives you perspective into your own insignificance", when I think for many people it, instead, means, "offers evidence for God or at least for the supernatural, in a non-spooky way".

So.. it's a good way to get a group of people all talking about different things and feeling like they're agreeing about things they don't necessary agree by means of an equivocation fallacy.

[–] Offlein 1 points 1 year ago

Thanks. Respectfully, though, it sounds like you are saying it's OK to take an event that happened to you and arbitrarily decide that it's going to be called "spiritual" without knowing what that means?

And then other people can take their own definitions that might be different, and read your story and be like, "Oh, I understand what this person means," without actually knowing.. potentially adding or removing their own meanings to it (the implication of the existence of a dirty, say) when that wasn't part of the original person's construct?

Because if that's right, I don't think I can go for that.

[–] Offlein 6 points 1 year ago (14 children)

One cannot have a "spiritual" experience without having a shared definition of spiritual that isn't just a deepity.

I would urge anyone who wants to share their "spiritual" experience to give a solid definition for the term first.

[–] Offlein 10 points 2 years ago

You should not.

Multiple Lemmy instances exist so that a single entity cannot control everything that happens across the federated Lemmyverse. Each instance can make its own rules.

As it stands there are more than enough instances, I believe with differing policies and rules. As such, you should not start a Lemmy instance.

[–] Offlein 1 points 2 years ago

Not thinking or even breathing.

view more: ‹ prev next ›