"Personally, I am fed up with spiritual bullies -- those who insist that it's only because of the individual's block that keeps her from truly seeing the beauty of UFOs -- while there may be a bit of truth in there in some cases, to self-righteously put forth these platitudes ignores the reality."
Hi, Regan.
At the broadest level, I suspect the friction involves the swinging of the public opinion pendulum since the last half of the 20th Century. The mutually exclusive, absolutist paradigms of yesterday, however valid or invalid their preponderances may be, cannot thrive in a world of competing ideas, experiences and truths facilitated by the internet.
Your point, on a more personal level, cuts both ways.
The moment I make any claim about my experiences being many, profound and immensely beneficial to me, the UFO Police not only reflexively consign me to the Space Brothers cult box, they jump to all kinds of conclusions based on a whole host of errant, toxic, chain-reactive assumptions.
What I find galling is how this is done without any type of direct engagement or conversation, and the more intellectual they presume themselves to be, the more likely they are to talk around, away, about or down to... rather than with. I don't think it is a coincidence they are often (1.) highly educated, [I resisted the temptation to use quotation marks], and; (2.) have a strong tendency to casually ignore contemporary aspects and manifestations of the phenomena, preferring, instead, to obsess over historical events, leaving them free to oh-so-conveniently lament the unavailability of witnesses and evidence. Drats! If only I had been around then to solve the riddle! Their modus operandi leaves them free to play in the fields of self-imposed ignorance (presented - falsely - as objectivity and intellectual rigor), issuing haughty edicts about what they (presented - falsely - as we) understand about UFO intelligences, which - in their hallowed, reverberating, feedback-squalling opinion - is invariably a smirk and a shrug. To do anything else is to risk looking like a sucker, a stooge, an easy mark. The loudest mouths in the UFO racket front mediocre brains, have little heart, and lack the humility to actually invest themselves in the enigma, lest they have to live with the debilitating horror of possibly having to admit error someday. They wonder why we "never get anywhere" while declaring the impossibility (presented - falsely - as "doubt") of doing so.
Talk about self-fulfilling prophecy.
One of the things I find fascinating, from a sociological perspective - in my experience - is that people with very limited exposure to ufology tend to be a hell of a lot less autocratic, less judgmental and more willing to having an actual conversation compared to those who consider themselves well-versed in the subject. There are lessons in there. I suspect, a whole lot of 'em.
1 comment:
"Personally, I am fed up with spiritual bullies -- those who insist that it's only because of the individual's block that keeps her from truly seeing the beauty of UFOs -- while there may be a bit of truth in there in some cases, to self-righteously put forth these platitudes ignores the reality."
Hi, Regan.
At the broadest level, I suspect the friction involves the swinging of the public opinion pendulum since the last half of the 20th Century. The mutually exclusive, absolutist paradigms of yesterday, however valid or invalid their preponderances may be, cannot thrive in a world of competing ideas, experiences and truths facilitated by the internet.
Your point, on a more personal level, cuts both ways.
The moment I make any claim about my experiences being many, profound and immensely beneficial to me, the UFO Police not only reflexively consign me to the Space Brothers cult box, they jump to all kinds of conclusions based on a whole host of errant, toxic, chain-reactive assumptions.
What I find galling is how this is done without any type of direct engagement or conversation, and the more intellectual they presume themselves to be, the more likely they are to talk around, away, about or down to... rather than with. I don't think it is a coincidence they are often (1.) highly educated, [I resisted the temptation to use quotation marks], and; (2.) have a strong tendency to casually ignore contemporary aspects and manifestations of the phenomena, preferring, instead, to obsess over historical events, leaving them free to oh-so-conveniently lament the unavailability of witnesses and evidence. Drats! If only I had been around then to solve the riddle! Their modus operandi leaves them free to play in the fields of self-imposed ignorance (presented - falsely - as objectivity and intellectual rigor), issuing haughty edicts about what they (presented - falsely - as we) understand about UFO intelligences, which - in their hallowed, reverberating, feedback-squalling opinion - is invariably a smirk and a shrug. To do anything else is to risk looking like a sucker, a stooge, an easy mark. The loudest mouths in the UFO racket front mediocre brains, have little heart, and lack the humility to actually invest themselves in the enigma, lest they have to live with the debilitating horror of possibly having to admit error someday. They wonder why we "never get anywhere" while declaring the impossibility (presented - falsely - as "doubt") of doing so.
Talk about self-fulfilling prophecy.
One of the things I find fascinating, from a sociological perspective - in my experience - is that people with very limited exposure to ufology tend to be a hell of a lot less autocratic, less judgmental and more willing to having an actual conversation compared to those who consider themselves well-versed in the subject. There are lessons in there. I suspect, a whole lot of 'em.
Post a Comment