Friday, May 25, 2007

Hello again Mr. Thacker.

Mr. Thacker we've obviously revealed a great blessing in our relationship. You see my arguments as superficial in the same way that I see yours.
It's curious that you think I was taking things personally. I thought the exact same thing about you a few times especially when that friend of ours first showed me your response to her bulletin. Seems to me we have more in common than either of us is willing to admit.

So where do we go from here?
Do you actually want to keep going with this train of thought and keep ourselves open to some sort of honest resolution?
I'm willing to admit my faults in the argument. Namely that my piece was too personal to be publicly accepted if you're willing to accept that at least for the one statement you picked out (if you're willing to allow me to isolate it) I sufficiently supported it using psychological principles (leaving entanglement out of it).
Other than that the only other thing left unresolved with this discussion is the "rules of art", especially with regards to universal language. You want to keep at it or move on?
I'm fine with moving on, I'm perfectly comfortable with my faults and failings in this situation.

So, let's hear your thesis! I'm excited for it.
Actually, before we start onto another train (hopefully one as invigorating as the last) do you mind if I ask a little about your background?
I know you've done your masters in phil. of religion. Is that right? What did you do your undergraduate work on? I also see that you at least have a personal curiosity about esotericism (ref. Zarathustra, Tao Te Ching etc.) but I'm just curious how far you've taken it in your personal life. Have you ever practiced any sort of transcendental meditation or anything similar? Any energy work, pranayama, asceticism, concentration practices, magick, or anything like these?
I'm just curious because if you have I think we have a LOT more to talk about than I first realized. BTW have you ever read any Eliphas Levi, Aleister Crowley, or Vivekananda? If you dig the Tao Te Ching you'll get a kick out of these (don't let all the qabalistic language deter you in Levi and Crowley, you're a bright guy, I'm sure you'll work yourself through it). If you do decide to tackle them make sure you don't make the mistake of underestimating them, (especially Crowley) like Lao Tzu they're deceptively simple sometimes.

But anyways, let's hear that thesis. I requested all the books from the library I could find by the guys you mentioned but unfortunately there was only a handful. Hopefully I'll be able to stay on the same page.

Cheers.

P.S. your link doesn't work, says the video has been removed or something.

No comments: