The OP was framed as conclusive. It was a declaration. So our posting here should do one of two things: 1) agree, or 2) disagree. I think roachboy's disagreement is valid, though I'm uncertain about his tone. The tone of his response is his decision, so I don't have a real problem with it. In a way, it matches the tone of the OP:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by drews
All we can do is distract ourselves with bullshit until we die. That's it. Just distract yourself by playing with a bright red bouncy ball until you die.
|
How are we to respond to this, really? drews, you've just told me, as a reader of your post, that I'm wasting my time, that my pursuit of objective truth is a joke. I actually found Roachboy's post refreshing, as it opened up this thread by giving us a foundation from which to discuss the OP. Now we can accuse roachboy of being long-winded, pretentious, incomprehensible, and condescending, or we can see his post as it is: apt, honest, comprehensive, and unforgiving. When discussing philosophical matters, we should do as much.
roachboy, thank you for taking the time to respond with such an interest.
drews, will you actually respond to what he said? I'm interested to know your thoughts on these ideas. Or is
everything in your world bullshit?