tenetnosce wrote:But he does warn against smoking pot! Of all things. Eating flesh once a week is O.K. but smoking a plant once a week is not?
Maybe he's seen that one has more detrimental affects than the other....? Maybe once a week meat eating is in fact, less worse than smoking pot, every day, seven days a week.
Doesn't seem so strange to me, but, that's just me.
(And you may not smoke pot seven days a week, but there are those who do. In fact one of them used to post here at NR...and his seven day a week pot habit showed in his posts! woowee...but, I digress! haha)
tenetnosce wrote:Sigh. I didn't mean to "pick on" Stuart. Yes his comment was the last straw, but it was precisely because it came from him. I LOVE his writing because his perspectives are some of the least limiting out there. That's EXACTLY WHY when I read that statement, I was like, "God Almighty! They've even got Stuart Wilde on the "Drugs Are Bad" train. Of all people, Stuart Wilde!"
Well, here it is: You're never going to agree with anybody's viewpoints 100%. Just because you like Stuart's other work does not make him a God-like guru who can never do or say anything wrong that you might disagree with.
To name two Stuie beliefs that I don't agree with:
- Dissolve the ego and subjegate yourself under everybody else;
- There's nothing wrong with chopping down all the trees and for humans to build build build up in the name of progress; Global warming is pure bunk.
I give a big "X!" to both of those points.
But I love his other stuff, so, whatever.
Stuart's just a dude, like you. The problem arises when people forget that and then got all GASP! Shocked! when out pops some belief from left field that they don't agree with.
I wrote to another NR'er last year that I LOVE LOVE the fact that he says things that I disagree with! I love it! It means he's human.
It sounds to me like you expect that you're supposed to never find something that he says which disagrees with your own philosophy. And I suspect you may have encountered this disappointing "slap with reality" in other authors you may have admired, who turned out in the end to have flaws and faults and personality traits that you don't agree with and opinions you disagree with...? Just guessing. Could totally be wrong here. But it is a recurring problem with many people who tend to put their favorite authors on pedestals. These people are never allowed to be human, never allowed to show their flaws, or have differing "out there" opinions.
tenetnosce wrote:
So what you're saying is that I could have written the same rant and substituted anybody else's name and you would have been like, "Right on T!"? That's too funny, and I only partially believe it. 
Well, no need for the sarcasm, tenetnosce, because I wasn't being sarcastic to you.
And yes, I did agree with you. You, and others are right about not overly focusing on the physical.
But regarding "inserting in somebody else's name", since you asked..........I "nitpicked" your opening rant not solely because "it was about Stuart Wilde", but because what you were criticizing about Stuie wasn't entirely valid.
Had you inserted somebody else's name, somebody recognizable to me, whose beliefs I'm aware of, and had you written things that were equally wrong/skewed, and which were twisting things around, then YES, I would have challenged you just the same. And NO I would not have been "Right on T."
Not to be rude, but I have yet to get on here and post "right on!" to anything you've written. Just not my style. And it bugs me when I see others doing that. Seems, oh, I don't know....kind of ass kissing. Like they don't have the guts to say certain things themselves, and can only wiggle up to others who do have the guts, and then pant their enthusiastic agreement.
"Me too! Me too!" "Right on!" "High five!" Just not me. But I digress. Topic for another thread I suppose. "Message board politics and psychology, 101!"
If somebody's being misrepresented, when faulty logic is being used, when things are being twisted and skewed in a minor or major way, then I'm there to set it right. That goes for defending myself, you, other NR posters, ANYbody who may be getting the short end of the stick.
Maybe I can be the world's first "logic super hero." 
"Logic Woman." On a mission to right the wrongs created by skewed perceptions and faulty logic.
j/k
"Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting "Holy shit ... what a ride!" - Anonymous
-----
"I get by with a little help from my (higher density) friends."
-----