Poemranker [Replying] Thu Nov 21 15:51:05 PST 2024

Replying to a comment on:

The Battle of Fort Bragg (Free verse) by Dovina

I used to stand on grassy bluff of Fort Braggâs ragged coast, observing the battlefield belowâ angry water versus steadfast land. Being young and full of motion, I sided with the sea. Attack was always quenched back then by strength of solid rock. Still I cheered the young and angry sea, and still it pounded. After many battles passed, some broken rocks, a lot of motion, I came again to grassy bluff, and looked from different view. Now memory moved, met solid desire, armies under different flags. Where before the rock was winning, the sea was breaking through. Gentle rolls still swelled in shallows near the shore, then toppled hard against the cliff. Resistance waned in longer view, Some rocks had slid away. Memory kept rolling in, breaking stone, dissolving need, taking it off in painful bits to spread beneath the sea.

ecargo

11-Apr-06/1:59 PM

Wow. Look, I think we are really talking at cross purposes. In no way did I attack anyone's beliefs. Should I accuse you of attacking my beliefs for insisting on the possibility of God? Of course not. I don't think I ever said categorically "there is no God." I may have said that I don't believe in God, but so? That's an attack on your belief?

My participation in this discussion was limited--or so I thought--to a fairly academic discussion of the concept of God *as it relates to* (1) the scientific method (which is how I got into this in the first place--well, it started, as things will, with an apple) and (2) Occam's Razor. That's it. I don't think logic is the only way to consider/think about/"experience" (if you like) God. People approach it many different ways. This was the way *I* was approaching it. At almost every step, I tried to stress that *I* don't need to add God to *my* world view and that *for me, personally* it was unessential, but I understood that, for you, it was not. Comparing belief in God to belief in pirate ghosts and unicorns was a reflection of *my* thought processes, not yours, since I find them to be possible but not, in *MY* worldview, particularly probable (and, also, I though ghost pirates were kind of funny). It was a response to a statement you made somewhere about things existing in other dimensions or whatever. If I misinterpreted what you said about God being beyond comprehension to mean that God was "that which is unknowable" it was because I misunderstood what you meant--it was not intended to "twist your words and spit them back at you." None of it meant as a slam, and I'm at a loss as to why you would take it that way. If I were to compare belief in God to belief in aliens, would you have taken that as a slam? Just because I don't believe in aliens, particularly, doesn't mean I'm insulting everyone that does. Nor does the mere discussion of belief and disbelief--or I didn't think it did, anyway. I never claimed any insider knowledge.

I don't think I was malicious or insulting or patronizing, and if I came off that way, well, sorry about that. If you read what I actually said, I don't think there's much basis for your accusations--but whatever. I don't know how I can make it clearer that my statements were narrow in scope (the concept of God vis a vis logic/Occam's Razor) and that I wasn't claiming any superior knowledge, just having what I thought was a friendly discussion about God and logic. I guess I was wrong. No hard feelings.

Track and Plan your submissions ; Read some Comics ; Get Paid for your Poetry

An internet tradition since June 9, 2001