Kay Kim said:
RecklessAllegory said:
To me there is no way I can explain my discernment so I won't even try, however, I feel that when "bad" things happen to people it changes them of course. I feel like there was a change in focus and everyone follows what they believe is right in the end so I'm not going to judge. I love Laura's writing style and her books are amazing but after a certain year I feel that a change occurred and well...I will focus on her books prior to that point.
I am sorry to tell you that I am not trusting your discernment one bit.
You just joined this forum one month ago, and already you think you know more than anybody.
Just like your name, you are Reckless cocky.
Probably your head is swelled too big from your miss-leading false personality.
Is that way of speaking, to anyone, necessary? Maybe there's a misunderstanding in the case of recklessallegory. Or maybe, that's just their opinion. Your head seems to be the only one ''swelling'', in my view, because reacting to something you seem to perceive as ignorant or ''cocky'' with anger and name-calling is no way to have a discussion. I wanted to hold my tongue, but telling someone they have a ''false personality'' after they've only made 4 post is a pretty shallow and mechanical way of responding to a simple disagreement, from where I'm sitting. Maybe you should try EE and practice external consideration, rather than lashing out at someone who's views don't align with yours.
As far as the perceived change in the material, if you disagree, that's fine. I'm sure you'd fit with the majority of people on this site who work very hard to keep it constantly updated and the readers of said material. I know I enjoy it myself, but I also acknowledge that 20 years has passed since this project was started. A lot can happen in 20 years, and not everyone is going to agree with any sort of change. An example of change could be SOTT. I think SOTT is entirely necessary because what's happening now on a socio-political level worldwide is very important and intertwines on a cosmic level as an indicator of what's to come, but some may not like that, especially coming from the wave series (which was written a little while ago) to the forum (which updates in real time, essentially). Because of SOTT's implementation, the time spent has to be partitioned differently, I'm sure, which is without a doubt going to upset some portion, no matter how big or small, of the reader base. That's just one example of change. Change isn't inherently a good or bad thing, and people are going to see it differently. That's just the bottom line, no need to get upset about it.
As far as ''discernment'' goes. I think it differs from person to person. I don't think it really matters if you trust someone's discernment that has little to nothing to do with you, other than having an account on the same website as you. Are you saying you think their discernment is objectively wrong, or wrong for themselves personally? Maybe their discernment is coming from a place that's trying to steer them towards a certain path that's right for them. There are so many things at play here that we don't know. Maybe their higher self is directing them to another community they'd fill a role in because that role is filled here? Who knows? I certainly don't (neither do you). it's completely open. My point is that whatever is stemming to cause their opinion is not inherently right or wrong. It's not recklessly cocky to listen to your gut feelings. Maybe how they feel about the community or laura has nothing to do with the community or laura and everything to do with how they feel on an internal level that none of us could possibly know for anyone, other than ourselves.
I think back to the stickied thread of the rules which states something similar to:
''maybe we aren't ready for you, maybe you aren't ready for us''
I'm not trying to persuade anyone (recklessallegory, specifically.) to leave, but I am pointing out that their are already guidelines in place for these types of discussion and lashing out at the ''newbie'' because you disagree with them is just not appropriate, at all. How long they've been on the forum doesn't matter either, considering a majority of it is accessible without an account and the material has been around for 20 years now. Not saying it was intentional, but this is the level of thought put into your rebuttal:
Straw Man Argument
[quote author=Wikipedia]
A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not advanced by that opponent.[1]
The so-called typical "attacking a straw man" argument creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition by covertly replacing it with a different proposition (i.e. "stand up a straw man") and then to refute or defeat that false argument ("knock down a straw man") instead of the original proposition.[2][3]
This technique has been used throughout history in polemical debate, particularly in arguments about highly charged emotional issues where a fiery, entertaining "battle" and the defeat of an "enemy" may be more valued than critical thinking or understanding both sides of the issue.
Allegedly, straw-man tactics were once known in some parts of the United Kingdom as an Aunt Sally, after a pub game of the same name where patrons threw sticks or battens at a post to knock off a skittle balanced on top.[4][5][/quote]
