> Because no one has your experience except you, no one really knows or > understands your interpretation of your said experience. Therefore that > statement can only be clear to you, your experience and your interpretation > of that experience. But you continue to state it in such a way that you believe > everyone ought to immediately understand what you mean. which according > to you, they could'nt possibly do.
Just sharing some experience and an interpretation. You do not need to except it. We can just toss out the empiricism, and most importantly radical empiricism and instead use ridicule. Never mind the 'Don't take my word for it. Find out for yourself.'
> So, it would seem that it's just bait for another long meaningless train of posts > just so you have something to fight against. A stage for you to act out your > play.
But you are one creating a drama with your rhetoric.
> I know having a self can be very painful, you want not to have a self that grieves > or becomes angry or feels lonliness although those feelings have a way of > asserting themselves anyway.
More of YOUR drama. So much, also, for "BUT it doesent mean we can't share and learn from each other either.".
> It seems that dealing with them catharticly and accepting them subdues the suffering > more than the outright intellectual denial of them.
I do not understand this statement.
Are you complaining that I will not play like a Philosophologist?