Posted by Ryan on March 02, 2000 at 19:55:00:
In Reply to: Re: For Ryan posted by Sean on March 01, 2000 at 20:47:22:
Well, I agree that it's not "garbage." I think spirituality is a waste of time and mental space but maybe garbage is too harsh of a word. It was in response to the pretentious way that Johnny was saying it that I used that word. Maybe "deadweight" is a better word than "garbage."
I don't think that artificial life is the "ultimate" goal of the enneagram. It's just one of many. I've expressed before that I think the most important use of the enneagram should be for psychological purposes. To help human beings overcome their issues and for them to realize their self-efficacy. Artificial life is just a very important offshoot of this study and one that I like to mention probably due to my interest in science fiction.
Always feel free to debate anything. There's not enough good debate on this board. Everybody on this board seems to be afraid of conflict and too busy trying to find ways to agree with each other. People are different, life is about realizing how we are unique and how conflict is inevitable and how we have to deal with it. I'm not here to make friends. If something bothers me I have no objection to speaking out. It's not like I have to see you all everyday. If J5 pisses me off I'll let him know it, even if it doesn't do much good (although to me it seems it has a little bit. He is no longer as abrasive). If your feelings are so hurt by free speech than I apologize because I treat others no differently than I expect to be treated.
Ryan
> I appreciate your response. I'd advise you to be aware there's a big difference between saying "I think too many of you use superstition to fill a void you all feel within yourselves" and calling something "spiritual garbage," implying by association that those who appreciate the Enneagram's spiritual implications and origination as a spiritual tool are also "garbage." The difference is I can have an interesting discussion with you about the former comment, and we can in the end perhaps agree to disagree. For the latter comment, you've already discounted, basically, everything I could offer - my opinion is garbage.
> For example, although we agree about the Enneagram's enormous significance in understanding human beings, I could not possibly disagree more with your insistence that human beings are totally quantifiable and the ultimate goal is to create artificial human beings using the Enneagram. I'd even have a hard time verbally encapsulating my vehemence to the opposite. But I don't put you down for your beliefs or call it garbage or attack you for it. If I did that then there'd be a lot of name-calling and not a lot of listening.
> I should say I think it's a mistake for you to purport to know why I or others find value in an understanding of human beings that goes on beyond personality - that I/we have a void to fill. Though I do appreciate your pity for those of us who lead such empty lives that we crave anything - even superstition - to fill the void. I envy your profound understanding of life that enables you to tell me what is Reality and where I have gone off track. That's the part I disagree with you about. You've never asked me what my life experience has been but you've already judged it. If that's the way artificial human beings will ultimately work then I think it's pretty clear how successful that's gonna be.
> Sean