@petewxyz saidWould it make more sense to you (I admit that I, too, find the word 'intoxicant' perhaps too harsh in this context) if instead of 'intoxicant', he had said 'comforter'?
Intoxicants depress cognitive function ultimately resulting in confusional states. I suspect that whilst the literal meaning of what you have written makes little sense you wrote this with the purpose of communicating something else and so respectfully ask you what you are trying to communicate?
-Removed-However, since 'intoxicant', as our friend the doctor states, is more associated with a depression of cognitive function and/or reaction time, it doesn't seem to have the same meaning as 'motivator', 'stimulant' or 'driver' and in fact, suggests the opposite.
This, rather than some sort of inability to understand metaphor, is what drives his confusion; at least it seems that way to me. He just asked you for a better word to describe what you mean. You provided three, and so understanding can be much more clear. I see no need to bring his 'ability to understand metaphor' into question. After all, he never brought your 'ability to construct metaphor' into question, he only asked for clarity.
@suzianne saidI guess the important thing would be to look for Dive's meaning and ask him for his preferred metaphor. I was really just illustrating what it is like if you latch on to the literal meaning of somebody's words as opposed to looking for the meaning that they wish to communicate about (as was done to me the other day and seems to be deemed as okay in this 'Spirituality' forum).
Would it make more sense to you (I admit that I, too, find the word 'intoxicant' perhaps too harsh in this context) if instead of 'intoxicant', he had said 'comforter'?
@petewxyz saidYes, I get you, believe me.
I guess the important thing would be to look for Dive's meaning and ask him for his preferred metaphor. I was really just illustrating what it is like if you latch on to the literal meaning of somebody's words as opposed to looking for the meaning that they wish to communicate about (as was done to me the other day and seems to be deemed as okay in this 'Spirituality' forum).
@petewxyz saidAre you still peeved about how you stated that you believe that a "true" atheist is one who ends up a theist, and how you doubled down on it, and doubled down on it again, and again, and again, and then you blamed everyone ELSE for thinking that you believe that a "true" atheist is one who ends up a theist?
I guess the important thing would be to look for Dive's meaning and ask him for his preferred metaphor. I was really just illustrating what it is like if you latch on to the literal meaning of somebody's words as opposed to looking for the meaning that they wish to communicate about (as was done to me the other day and seems to be deemed as okay in this 'Spirituality' forum).
2 edits
@fmf saidIt was more a comment on the treatment people generally receive here (you refer to and attempt to reignite one specific example) as described in the post that you quote but ignore.
Are you still peeved about how you stated that you believe that a "true" atheist is one who ends up a theist, and how you doubled down on it, and doubled down on it again, and again, and again, and then you blamed everyone ELSE for thinking that you believe that a "true" atheist is one who ends up a theist?
@petewxyz saidSo you are stil peeved? You made a fool of yourself but it wasn't your fault, it was other people's fault, right?
It was more a comment on the treatment people generally receive here (you refer to and attempt to reignite one specific example) as described in the post that you quote but ignore.
@petewxyz saidYou are baffled by the word "intoxicants"? Why? Here's what you said about sudden religious conversions a couple of weeks ago:
Intoxicants depress cognitive function ultimately resulting in confusional states. I suspect that whilst the literal meaning of what you have written makes little sense you wrote this with the purpose of communicating something else and so respectfully ask you what you are trying to communicate?
"People become deluded in an instant (certainly seen that in practice) but personality changes slowly. According to most psychiatrists and psychologists there is a clear distinction, but I think that is overly certain. How do you fit sudden religious conversion into that scheme. Should you treat it with antipsychotics?"
I am unclear whether Dive and FMF cannot understand my meaning or obtusely refuse to look for it, I am giving them the benefit of the doubt by continuing to post.
I am unclear why they make certain statements about perceiving limitations in my ability to understand and communicate, but since these are abilities that have been assessed by respected professional bodies I have no reason to be interested in these comments beyond noticing a somewhat alarming certainty on their parts, where certainty about the other is not indicated.
The issue I am attempting to discuss is whether their approach belongs in a forum called 'Spirituality'. It really isn't going to result in anything better than a playground squabble if you just force your certain opinion about what the other is trying to say as opposed to seeking the meaning and motivation behind their words.