>>509722012
I like the way you think. Our "differences" as you perceive them, are, I think, merely semantic and formalistic. You and I, unfortunately, do not know each other and are not familiar with each other's lexicons of meaning; nor with each other's innate approach. So you understand me better, I do not dwell on the past any more than a sail dwells in the wind that has flowed over it to move it forward. I merely try to recognize the ebbs and flows, but on these patterns I do dwell to better understand the greater cycles and laws. I hope you understand my way of expressing it. I think we generally agree and think in the same metaphysical terms, albeit with variable weights and nuances. That said, I will keep your observations in mind, and check my thinking, since we all have our blind-spots. Your observations are a gift. Iron sharpens iron, as they say.
As to wrath: Yes, wrath can have many meanings....I do not take wrath as malevolent necessarily; merely a great force essentially, impersonal, which balances inexorably that which is out of kilter. More like a species of wisdom, which imposes order with courage and fidelity to the truth. No desire to harm, whatsoever. When I speak of wrath, I might as well be speaking of the wrath with which gravity acts to bring all things to itself. The personal, private wrath, though, never bring anything good, just more disturbance. Blah, blah, blah.
I enjoy speaking with you Anon, and think it's a shame we can't discuss all this more fully over a beer. I certainly would very much enjoy it. Its rare to encounter someone who thinks these things (ideas, etc) are important and is willing to engage (even on /pol/).
